Tag Archives: water contamination

Water contamination news: USA – Fracking – Investigation reveals fracking fluids were illegally dumped – STEM water education – Why dumping chemicals and waste endangers our water supply.

Save the water news education and water research postings

Save the Water™
Daily
News Brief

Courtesy of
www.kget.com
Sir Richard Branson
Save the Water™
Water Research
Water Education
shared as educational
material only.
AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

 
Rating for savethewater.org
 
A day in the life of a scientist
Waorldwater day every day
water contamination pictures

Water contamination news: USA – Fracking

Water contamination news USA -  Fracking- Investigation reveals fracking fluids were illegally dumped - STEM water education - Why dumping chemicals and waste endangers our water supply.

Investigation reveals fracking fluids were illegally dumped

Best viewed using Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, and Safari.
Save the Water™ / Water Research / Water Education / Global Water News ©2013
Article and video courtesy of www.KGET.com

After a video posted to YouTube sparked an investigation the state’s water watchdog says fluids containing chemicals from an oil well were illegally dumped into the ground.

The Vintage Oil Company well was drilled and fracked, a controversial process of extracting oil from dense rock. Although the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board said its investigation isn’t complete but board officials say they know already something illegal was done. “Nobody is protecting us,” said almond farmer Tom Frantz.

We first showed you video last February of an Vintage Oil Company well being drilled near an almond orchard in Shafter. “Ten yards away a farmer was flood irrigating his almonds at about the same time,” said Frantz. Frantz captured the video back in October. At first he thought it was the release of fracking fluids, chemicals pumped into the ground to make oil flow. “It turns out they weren’t fracking until the next day they were just getting ready to frack,” said Frantz.

Documents released by Vintage reveal this was the release of what the oil company calls drilling and formation fluids. “We do not believe it was in compliance with the conditional waiver,” said Clay Rodgers, Executive Officer for the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.

However the documents reveal fracking fluids were released at that site at a later date. A letter says on October 7th and 8th fracking fluids “estimated to be five barrels or less on each date” were discharged into an unlined pond. According to the Rodgers, that is illegal. Tom Frantz thinks it’s happening often.

“I wasn’t that lucky to get there on the only day the only time they did something illegal. If I’m that lucky I should get a lottery ticket,” said Frantz. Vintage said in the documents they do not believe “drilling operations…contaminated soil, creeks, wetlands.” Vintage did say however the company is making progress toward “ceasing the use of unlined sumps” near farmland. “We think that is a promising solution that they are not going to use the unlined ponds,” said Rodgers.

But Tom Frantz said it’s too little late. “We already see when no one is watching, they do something illegal and this is the tip of the iceberg,” said Frantz. A Vintage spokesperson would not comment saying it was “premature.” Once Central Valley Water Board completes their investigation the company could face fines and a possible drilling moratorium. According to vintage, 83 percent of what was released was water, 8 percent was sand and the rest were chemicals like methanol, known as wood alcohol, potassium hydroxide, a corrosive substance and sodium hydroxide, also known as lye. There are a small percentage of chemicals not disclosed, which the company calls “trade secrets.” According to Vintage documents these chemicals were kept from ground water.

But Frantz who took video that lead to the investigation of the fracked well thinks otherwise. “It may not be a hazardous substance but do you want to drink it do you want it in your water no,” said Frantz.

Why dumping chemicals and waste endangers our water supply

Save the Water™ Education Dept. Groundwater can become contaminated in many ways. If rain water or surface water comes into contact with contaminated soil while seeping into the ground, it can become polluted and can carry the pollution from the soil to the groundwater.

Groundwater can also become contaminated when liquid hazardous substances themselves soak down through the soil or rock into the groundwater. Some liquid hazardous substances do not mix with the groundwater but remain pooled within the soil or bedrock. These pooled substances can act as long-term sources of groundwater contamination as the groundwater flows through the soil or rock and comes into contact with them.

Right click on image and view image to enlarge Groundwater can become contaminated in many ways. If rain water or surface water comes into contact with contaminated soil while seeping into the ground, it can become polluted and can carry the pollution from the soil to the groundwater. Groundwater can also become contaminated when liquid hazardous substances themselves soak down through the soil or rock into the groundwater. Some liquid hazardous substances do not mix with the groundwater but remain pooled within the soil or bedrock. These pooled substances can act as long-term sources of groundwater contamination as the groundwater flows through the soil or rock and comes into contact with them.
The dangers of fracking

Fracking dangers

Top of page

WHAT IS FRACKING

Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?

“Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?”

WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

www.wholeworldwater.co

Top of page

 

Water Facts: Water Education Banners

Water facts

Save the Water™ (STW™) wish to thank our friends, supporters and those who work to educate in regards to the current global water crisis.
STW™ Research and education department wish to thank you and provide water fact banners for your site. You will find thirty water fact banners herein this post (One month). These banner facts are for you to utilize in any way that you deem will help educate your readers in regards to our global water crisis.
We ask but one thing: Please do not alternate the following, as it took many volunteers to provide this info.

1) Copy and paste image
2) Copy and paste the link (above or below) If you have a problem see #3
3) If you have a problem contact us and Anthony will guide you through your issues. We wish to assist any water education site. @954 226 7466

Water

Top of page

Top of page


For more banners click here


Water news directory – 750 articles-March 2012~June 2013: updated daily – click here

Support Save the Water™ click here.

Any donation no matter how small assists Save the Water™ in researching and publishing water education articles such as this. Your support is appreciated as STW™ relies on your assistance to continue each day providing you this information. Click here to help support Save the Water™
Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™
is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts


Vol. V
652
June 9 2013

Water
Research

Crisis
Response

Humanitarian
Projects

Education
Daily News
DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS


A day in the life of a scientist
World Water Day Everyday
water contamination pictures

Present and future generations must be educated in water sustainability issues. With proper funding Save the Water™ will provide that extensive instruction.

We respect the right of every individual to have access to safe and clean drinking water. Your financial support and generosity is needed help support our mission.

 

 help support STW save the water Paypal
Please make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc.
and mail to:
Save the Water Inc
500 SW 69th Terr.
Hollywood Florida 33023
To Donate A Gift-In-Kind Please
Contact Us
Help make children Florida’s No. 1 priority.

Top of page

Comments Off

Global water news: India water crisis – Liquid gold: A polluted harvest – A regulatory black hole – Why its ‘no’ to tap water.

Save the water news education and water research postings

Save the Water™
Daily
News Brief

Courtesy of
Girija Shivakumar
Gargi Parsai
Smriti Kak Ramachandran
thehindu.com
Sir Richard Branson
shared as educational
material only.
AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

 
Rating for savethewater.org
 

Waorldwater day every day

Global water news – India water crisis

Liquid gold: A polluted harvest – A regulatory black hole – Why its no to tap water.

Liquid gold: A polluted harvest.

Girija Shivakumar /thehindu.com

Chronic water scarcity has gripped India as the groundwater table continues to fall at an alarming rate. The current crisis is not just about the disturbed demand-supply curve but mismanagement of resources. Most water sources are contaminated by sewage and agricultural run-off.

Rising population, sprawling cities, and an enormous and thirsty farm belt have jeopardized a feeble, ill-kept public water and sanitation network.

Water problems are endemic, mainly because system maintenance is almost non-existent. As India celebrates ‘water conservation year,’ a faulty municipal system is reinforcing several stark inequalities. There has been a rapid decline of water levels in Delhi and Andhra Pradesh, with 85 and 74 per cent of wells respectively registering a fall in the water level during 2007-2012.

Sunita Narain, director-general of the Centre for Science and Environment, says municipal supply is caught up in a problem resulting in rising cost of supply and an increasing number of people who need the water.

“Most cities are caught in a very vicious cycle as costs are rising, sourcing the water is taking up a huge amount of energy, the distribution network requires longer and longer pipelines. Municipal agencies spend all their time extending the length of the pipelines rather than repairing them. They are not able to supply water to people at affordable prices,” Ms. Narain told The Hindu.

She suggests that we need a different way to reform the municipal supply systems because today it is the poor in India who are the worst-affected. The rich virtually exit the municipal system and often do not pay water or sewage charges. For example, New Delhi has the lowest water and sewage charges in the country.

Ms. Narain warns that the rich have the option of bottled water, leaving the poor to drink what is polluted. This has huge health costs and social implications. She reiterates that water is an issue of need. “Today, the challenge in India is to fix the municipal supply not to get everyone to drink bottled water.”

Companies that use the natural resource for profit pay no charge or royalty for the raw water they use — only a nominal ‘cess’ varying from State to State (a few paise per kilolitre).

There are no credible data available in the country on the quantum of the groundwater, surface or spring water that is being extracted and used by the bottled water and beverages industry, even in the authorised sector.

A regulatory black hole

Gargi Parsai / thehindu.com

Officials admit to proliferation of unauthorised manufacturers who are selling “just about any water — be it rainwater, river or nallah water” as ‘treated’ bottled water under different brand names.

The Water Resources Ministry puts the onus of ensuring quality (including display of composition of the packaged natural mineral or drinking water) and quantity on the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), which comes the Department of Consumer Affairs. Sources in the Ministry also point out that although “municipal water is cheapest and assured in quality” water pipelines cannot be laid in all nooks and corners of the country. Places devoid of municipal water supply are increasingly getting dependent on water tankers or bottled water for drinking purposes. The situation worsens during drought months.

Of the 5,842 blocks assessed in the country in 2009, 802 were over-exploited for groundwater; 169 blocks were critical; 523 were semi-critical; and 4,277 were safe.

Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) Chairman Sushil Gupta says the Board does not give permission for groundwater extraction in over-exploited zones. In critical areas, permission is given for extracting 50 per cent of the water the company can recharge; in semi-critical, excavation can be done equivalent to 100 per cent rechargeable water; and in safe zones 200 per cent of rechargeable water can be extracted.

The BIS has to ensure that any company or individual seeking quality certification for using groundwater as raw material has a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the CGWB. It also has to ensure compliance with physical, chemical and microbiological standards. But there is no systematic monitoring to ensure that excess quantities are not extracted and standards are being maintained as is obvious from the numerous brand names flooding the markets. The BIS could not be reached for comment.

The 14 States that have adopted the Central Model Ground Water Regulation Bill are free to give permission to beverages and bottled water companies for extraction of groundwater and more often than not, with little monitoring. For the States that do not have the Act in place, permission is taken from the Centre. Again, no permission is required or taken for drawing river, canal or natural spring water for bottling or use in soft drinks.

Union Secretary for Water Resources S.K. Sarkar feels the problem should have a long-term solution like mapping of aquifers to set limits on how much water can be extracted, at what place, with what recharge, at what distance between wells and at what depth.

The 12th Five-Year Plan will see three-dimensional aquifer mapping and participatory management to decide how much water can be allocated to various users, including industry.

Why its ‘no’ to tap water

Smriti Kak Ramachandran / thehindu.com

In 2002, the Delhi Jal Board that supplies water in the capital set up its own bottling plant; this, by its own admission, was done to address “quantity, not quality,” issues. Bottled water packaged as ‘Jal’ from the plant, the Board claims, was used to make up for deficit supply in several tail-end areas.

The plant continues to produce water, though supply to most targeted areas has improved with the commissioning of the Sonia Vihar Water Treatment Plant that brings Ganga water to the city.

“Bottled water from the plant is for bridging the gap in demand and supply, not because we are not providing clean water. The water that leaves our treatment plants is fit to drink straight from the tap; contamination occurs as the water travels from the plants to individual connections. We adhere to the WHO and BIS norms, and the water we produce is absolutely safe for potable use,” says Debashree Mukherjee, chief executive officer of the utility.

Priced at Rs. 45 a jar of 20 litres, ‘Jal’ has already found a niche in the bottled water market that continues to grow; efforts are under way to increase its reach. A new bottling plant is being commissioned at Savda Gevra, (a resettlement area for the weaker sections), which does not have piped supply.

So if the Board provides clean water, what explains the presence of impurities, bacteria, particle matter that lead to discoloured, smelly and, in a few cases, totally unfit-for-consumption supply? And why is the market for water purifying devices and bottled water growing?

“The pipelines are not pressurised always because of intermittent system of supply. The risk of contamination increases in depressurised systems; it gets worse when water carrying pipelines are laid close to sewerage systems and consumers use online boosters to draw water,” Ms. Mukherjee says.

Uncared for storage systems at the consumer end, poor maintenance of service pipelines and poor planning of cities — development and infrastructure follow occupation — are some other reasons for poor quality, the Board claims.

In 2012, the Union Urban Development Ministry issued an advisory to all the States, asking for water supply and sanitation services to be recognised as ‘basic services.’ Recognising the need for reliability, sustainability and quality and their linkage to social and economic development, the Ministry stressed that “in order to contribute effectively to economic development, these basic services need to be structured as ‘economic services,’ working on principles such as universal access and self-sustainability.”

To improve water supply, the Ministry suggested increasing autonomy of urban local bodies, evaluating the performance of service-providers and making them accountable.

Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?

“Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?”

WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

www.wholeworldwater.co

Top of page

 

Water Facts: Water Education Banners

Water facts

Save the Water™ (STW™) wish to thank our friends, supporters and those who work to educate in regards to the current global water crisis.
STW™ Research and education department wish to thank you and provide water fact banners for your site. You will find thirty water fact banners herein this post (One month). These banner facts are for you to utilize in any way that you deem will help educate your readers in regards to our global water crisis.
We ask but one thing: Please do not alternate the following, as it took many volunteers to provide this info.

1) Copy and paste image
2) Copy and paste the link (above or below) If you have a problem see #3
3) If you have a problem contact us and Anthony will guide you through your issues. We wish to assist any water education site. @954 226 7466

Water

Top of page

Top of page


For more banners click here


Water news directory – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here
Support Save the Water™ click here.

Any donation no matter how small assists Save the Water™ in researching and publishing water education articles such as this. Your support is appreciated as STW™ relies on your assistance to continue each day providing you this information. Click here to help support Save the Water™
Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™
is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts

Vol. V
651
June 9 2013

Water
Research

Crisis
Response

Humanitarian
Projects

Education
Daily News
DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS

World Water Day Everyday

Present and future generations must be educated in water sustainability issues. With proper funding Save the Water™ will provide that extensive instruction.

We respect the right of every individual to have access to safe and clean drinking water. Your financial support and generosity is needed help support our mission.

 

 help support STW save the water Paypal
Please make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc.
and mail to:
Save the Water Inc
500 SW 69th Terr.
Hollywood Florida 33023
To Donate A Gift-In-Kind Please
Contact Us
Help make children Florida’s No. 1 priority.

Top of page

Comments Off

Water news: Florida – Miami-Dade agrees to $1.6 billion upgrade of its sewer system to eliminate sewage overflows.

Save the water news education and water research postings

Save the Water™
Daily
News Brief

Courtesy of
EPA
Wikipedia Foundation
Sir Richard Branson
Save the Water™
Water Education
shared as educational
material only.
AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

 
Rating for savethewater.org
 

Waorldwater day every day

Water news: Florida

Florida water

Miami-Dade agrees to $1.6 billion upgrade of its sewer system to eliminate sewage overflows.

Contact: Davina Marraccini, 404-562-8293 (direct), 404-562-8400 (main), marraccini.davina@epa.gov

ATLANTA – Under a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today, Miami-Dade County in Florida has agreed to invest in major upgrades to its wastewater treatment plants and wastewater collection and transmission systems in order to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. The state of Florida and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) are co-plaintiffs with the United States in this action.

Under the terms of the consent decree, Miami-Dade will rehabilitate its wastewater treatment plants and its wastewater collection and transmission system within 15 years. The county will also develop and implement management operation and maintenance programs to help ensure the sewer system is properly operated and maintained in the future. By implementing these measures, Miami-Dade is expected to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows from its wastewater collection and transmission system and achieve compliance with its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.

“Sewage overflows are a significant problem in the Southeast because of inadequate and aging infrastructure,” said Stan Meiburg, Acting Regional Administrator of EPA’s Southeastern office. “This agreement demonstrates the county’s commitment to address its sewage problems. Eliminating overflows of raw sewage will comply with the Clean Water Act and benefit the Miami-Dade community by providing a cleaner and healthier environment.”

“Miami-Dade County is one of the world’s premier resort destinations and is home to America’s Everglades, two aquatic preserves as well as Bill Baggs Cape Florida, Oleta River and The Barnacle Historic state parks,” said Florida Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Herschel T. Vinyard Jr. “This agreement will bring lasting environmental and recreational benefits to the citizens and visitors of Miami-Dade County by reducing the threats posed by untreated sewage overflows that degrade water quality and contribute to beach closures,”

Between January 2007 and May 2013, Miami-Dade reported 211 sanitary sewer overflows totaling more than 51 million gallons. Such overflows included a number of large volume overflows from ruptured force mains. At least 84 overflows, totaling over 29 million gallons of raw sewage, reached navigable waters of the United States. Miami-Dade’s Central District wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) also experienced several violations of the effluent limits contained in its NPDES permit. EPA also documented numerous operation and maintenance violations at this same WWTP during inspections in September 2011, April 2012 and April 2013.

Miami-Dade estimates it will spend approximately $1.6 billion to complete the upgrades required by the consent decree and come into compliance with the Clean Water Act. Under the settlement, Miami-Dade will also pay a civil penalty of $978,100 ($511,800 to be paid to the United States and $466,300 to FDEP) and complete a supplemental environmental project costing $2,047,200.

Miami-Dade’s supplemental environmental project involves the installation of approximately 7,660 linear feet of gravity sewer mains through the Green Technology Corridor, an area that is currently using septic tanks. Businesses in the area have been unable to connect to the sewer system because sewer lines are lacking. Disconnecting industrial users from septic tanks will improve water quality in the Biscayne aquifer and nearby surface waters and prevent future contamination.

The terms and conditions of the settlement announced today will update, replace and supersede two existing consent decrees between the United States and the county, the 1994 First Partial Consent Decree and the 1995 Second and Final Partial Consent Decree. Both of these existing consent decrees will be terminated upon entry of the new, proposed consent decree. The parties to this settlement recognized that since entry of the previous consent decrees, conditions within and circumstances surrounding Miami-Dade’s sewer system have changed over the last 18 years, including the causes and locations of sanitary sewer overflows. As a result, appropriate modifications and updates to the previous settlements are included in the new settlement.

Today’s announcement is the latest in a series of Clean Water Act settlements, including sanitary sewer overflow remediation and combined sewer overflow control plans that will reduce the discharge of raw sewage and contaminated stormwater into U.S. rivers, streams and lakes. It is part of EPA’s national enforcement initiative to keep raw sewage and contaminated stormwater out of the nation’s waterways. Reductions in sanitary sewer overflows are accomplished by obtaining municipal utilities’ commitments to implement timely, affordable solutions to these problems.

The settlement, lodged today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, is subject to a 30-day public comment period and approval by the federal court. The settlement will be available for viewing at www.justice.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html

More information about EPA’s national enforcement initiative: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/initiatives/2011sewagestormwater.html

“Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?”

WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

www.wholeworldwater.co

 

Water Facts: Water Education Banners

Water facts

Save the Water™ (STW™) wish to thank our friends, supporters and those who work to educate in regards to the current global water crisis.
STW™ Research and education department wish to thank you and provide water fact banners for your site. You will find thirty water fact banners herein this post (One month). These banner facts are for you to utilize in any way that you deem will help educate your readers in regards to our global water crisis.
We ask but one thing: Please do not alternate the following, as it took many volunteers to provide this info.

1) Copy and paste image
2) Copy and paste the link (above or below) If you have a problem see #3
3) If you have a problem contact us and Anthony will guide you through your issues. We wish to assist any water education site. @954 226 7466

Water

Top of page

Top of page


For more banners click here



Millions of celebrities have joined Matt Damon’s “Toilet Strike” protesting the lack of access to safe water and adequate sanitation for billions. Just today, innovative entrepreneur Richard Branson, rockstar-philanthropist Bono, and actress Olivia Wilde have made their own support public.

Water news directory – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here
Support Save the Water™ click here.

Any donation no matter how small assists Save the Water™ in researching and publishing water education articles such as this. Your support is appreciated as STW™ relies on your assistance to continue each day providing you this information. Click here to help support Save the Water™
Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™
is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts

Vol. V
650
June 8 2013

Water
Research

Crisis
Response

Humanitarian
Projects

Education
Daily News
DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS

World Water Day Everyday

Present and future generations must be educated in water sustainability issues. With proper funding Save the Water™ will provide that extensive instruction.

We respect the right of every individual to have access to safe and clean drinking water. Your financial support and generosity is needed help support our mission.

 

 help support STW save the water Paypal
Please make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc.
and mail to:
Save the Water Inc
500 SW 69th Terr.
Hollywood Florida 33023
To Donate A Gift-In-Kind Please
Contact Us
Help make children Florida’s No. 1 priority.

Top of page

Comments Off

Water contamination education news: Fracking – Fracking defined – Fracking infographics – Water education resources.

Water contamination news: Fracking

Fracking education update

To view hydraulic fracturing infograghics click on toggles.

Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Hydraulic fracturing is the propagation of fractures in a rock layer by a pressurized fluid. Some hydraulic fractures form naturally certain veins or dikes are examples—and can create conduits along which gas and petroleum from source rocks may migrate to reservoir rocks. Induced hydraulic fracturing or hydrofracturing, commonly known as fracing, fraccing, or fracking, is a technique used to release petroleum, natural gas (including shale gas, tight gas, and coal seam gas), or other substances for extraction. This type of fracturing creates fractures from a wellbore drilled into reservoir rock formations.

The first use of hydraulic fracturing was in 1947. However, it was only in 1998 that modern fracturing technology, referred to as horizontal slickwater fracturing, made possible the economical extraction of shale gas; this new technology was first used in the Barnett Shale in Texas. The energy from the injection of a highly pressurized hydraulic fracturing fluid creates new channels in the rock, which can increase the extraction rates and ultimate recovery of hydrocarbons.

Proponents of hydraulic fracturing point to the economic benefits from vast amounts of formerly inaccessible hydrocarbons the process can extract. Opponents point to potential environmental impacts, including contamination of ground water, risks to air quality, the migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals to the surface, surface contamination from spills and flowback and the health effects of these. For these reasons hydraulic fracturing has come under scrutiny internationally, with some countries suspending or banning it.

History

Fracturing as a method to stimulate shallow, hard rock oil wells dates back to the 1860s. It was applied by oil producers in the US states of Pennsylvania, New York, Kentucky, and West Virginia by using liquid and later also solidified nitroglycerin. Later, the same method was applied to water and gas wells. The idea to use acid as a nonexplosive fluid for well stimulation was introduced in the 1930s. Due to acid etching, fractures would not close completely and therefore productivity was enhanced. The same phenomenon was discovered with water injection and squeeze cementing operations.

The relationship between well performance and treatment pressures was studied by Floyd Farris of Stanolind Oil and Gas Corporation. This study became a basis of the first hydraulic fracturing experiment, which was conducted in 1947 at the Hugoton gas field in Grant County of southwestern Kansas by Stanolind. For the well treatment 1,000 US gallons (3,800 l; 830 imp gal) of gelled gasoline and sand from the Arkansas River was injected into the gas-producing limestone formation at 2,400 feet (730 m).

The experiment was not very successful as deliverability of the well did not change appreciably. The process was further described by J.B. Clark of Stanolind in his paper published in 1948. A patent on this process was issued in 1949 and an exclusive license was granted to the Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Company. On March 17, 1949, Halliburton performed the first two commercial hydraulic fracturing treatments in Stephens County, Oklahoma, and Archer County, Texas.[15] Since then, hydraulic fracturing has been used to stimulate approximately a million oil and gas wells.

In the Soviet Union, the first hydraulic proppant fracturing was carried out in 1952. In Western Europe in 1977–1985, hydraulic fracturing was conducted at Rotliegend and Carboniferous gas-bearing sandstones in Germany, Netherlands onshore and offshore gas fields, and the United Kingdoms sector of the North Sea. Other countries in Europe and Northern Africa included Norway, the Soviet Union, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Austria, France, Italy, Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey, Tunisia, and Algeria.

Due to shale’s high porosity and low permeability, technology research, development and demonstration were necessary before hydraulic fracturing could be commercially applied to shale gas deposits. In the 1970s the United States government initiated the Eastern Gas Shales Project, a set of dozens of public-private hydraulic fracturing pilot demonstration projects. During the same period, the Gas Research Institute, a gas industry research consortium, received approval for research and funding from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

In 1977, the Department of Energy pioneered massive hydraulic fracturing in tight sandstone formations. In 1997, based on earlier techniques used by Union Pacific Resources, now part of Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, Mitchell Energy, now part of Devon Energy, developed the hydraulic fracturing technique known as “slickwater fracturing” which involves adding chemicals to water to increase the fluid flow, that made the shale gas extraction economical.

Method A hydraulic fracture is formed by pumping the fracturing fluid into the wellbore at a rate sufficient to increase pressure downhole to exceed that of the fracture gradient (pressure gradient) of the rock. The fracture gradient is defined as the pressure increase per unit of the depth due to its density and it is usually measured in pounds per square inch per foot or bars per meter. The rock cracks and the fracture fluid continues further into the rock, extending the crack still further, and so on.

Operators typically try to maintain “fracture width”, or slow its decline, following treatment by introducing into the injected fluid a proppant – a material such as grains of sand, ceramic, or other particulates, that prevent the fractures from closing when the injection is stopped and the pressure of the fluid is reduced. Consideration of proppant strengths and prevention of proppant failure becomes more important at greater depths where pressure and stresses on fractures are higher. The propped fracture is permeable enough to allow the flow of formation fluids to the well. Formation fluids include gas, oil, salt water, fresh water and fluids introduced to the formation during completion of the well during fracturing.

During the process fracturing fluid leakoff, loss of fracturing fluid from the fracture channel into the surrounding permeable rock occurs. If not controlled properly, it can exceed 70% of the injected volume. This may result in formation matrix damage, adverse formation fluid interactions, or altered fracture geometry and thereby decreased production efficiency.

The location of one or more fractures along the length of the borehole is strictly controlled by various methods that create or seal off holes in the side of the wellbore. Typically, hydraulic fracturing is performed in cased wellbores and the zones to be fractured are accessed by perforating the casing at those locations.

Hydraulic-fracturing equipment used in oil and natural gas fields usually consists of a slurry blender, one or more high-pressure, high-volume fracturing pumps (typically powerful triplex or quintuplex pumps) and a monitoring unit. Associated equipment includes fracturing tanks, one or more units for storage and handling of proppant, high-pressure treating iron, a chemical additive unit (used to accurately monitor chemical addition), low-pressure flexible hoses, and many gauges and meters for flow rate, fluid density, and treating pressure. Fracturing equipment operates over a range of pressures and injection rates, and can reach up to 100 megapascals (15,000 psi) and 265 litres per second (9.4 cu ft/s) (100 barrels per minute).

Fracturing fluids.

Proppants and fracking fluids and List of additives for hydraulic fracturing

High-pressure fracture fluid is injected into the wellbore, with the pressure above the fracture gradient of the rock. The two main purposes of fracturing fluid is to extend fractures and to carry proppant into the formation, the purpose of which is to stay there without damaging the formation or production of the well. Two methods of transporting the proppant in the fluid are used – high-rate and high-viscosity. High-viscosity fracturing tends to cause large dominant fractures, while high-rate (slickwater) fracturing causes small spread-out micro-fractures.

This fracture fluid contains water-soluble gelling agents (such as guar gum) which increase viscosity and efficiently deliver the proppant into the formation.

The fluid injected into the rock is typically a slurry of water, proppants, and chemical  additives. Additionally, gels, foams, and compressed gases, including nitrogen, carbon dioxide and air can be injected. Typically, of the fracturing fluid 90% is water and 9.5% is sand with the chemical additives accounting to about 0.5%.

A proppant is a material that will keep an induced hydraulic fracture open, during or following a fracturing treatment, and can be gel, foam, or slickwater-based. Fluids make tradeoffs in such material properties as viscosity, where more viscous fluids can carry more concentrated proppant; the energy or pressure demands to maintain a certain flux pump rate (flow velocity) that will conduct the proppant appropriately; pH, various rheological factors, among others. Types of proppant include silica sand, resin-coated sand, and man-made ceramics.

These vary depending on the type of permeability or grain strength needed. The most commonly used proppant is silica sand, though proppants of uniform size and shape, such as a ceramic proppant, is believed to be more effective. Due to a higher porosity within the fracture, a greater amount of oil and natural gas is liberated.

The fracturing fluid varies in composition depending on the type of fracturing used, the conditions of the specific well being fractured, and the water characteristics. A typical fracture treatment uses between 3 and 12 additive chemicals. Although there may be unconventional fracturing fluids, the typical used chemical additives are:

•Acids—hydrochloric acid (usually 28%-5%), or acetic acid is used in the pre-fracturing stage for cleaning the perforations and initiating fissure in the near-wellbore rock.

•Sodium chloride (salt)—delays breakdown of the gel polymer chains.

•Polyacrylamide and other friction reducers—minimizes the friction between fluid and pipe, thus allowing the pumps to pump at a higher rate without having greater pressure on the surface. Polyacrylamide are good suspension agents ensuring the proppant does not fall out.

• Ethylene glycol—prevents formation of scale deposits in the pipe.

•Borate salts—used for maintaining fluid viscosity during the temperature increase.

•Sodium and potassium carbonates—used for maintaining effectiveness of crosslinkers.

•Glutaraldehyde—used as disinfectant of the water (bacteria elimination).

•Guar gum and other water-soluble gelling agents—increases viscosity of the fracturing fluid to deliver more efficiently the proppant into the formation.

•Citric acid—used for corrosion prevention.

•Isopropanol—increases the viscosity of the fracture fluid.

The most common chemical used for hydraulic fracturing in the United States in 2005–2009 was methanol, while some other most widely used chemicals were isopropyl alcohol, 2-butoxyethanol, and ethylene glycol.

Typical fluid types.

• Conventional linear gels. These gels are cellulose derivatives (carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, carboxymethyl hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, methyl hydroxyl ethyl cellulose), guar or its derivatives (hydroxypropyl guar, carboxymethyl hydroxypropyl guar) based, with other chemicals providing the necessary chemistry for the desired results.

•Borate-crosslinked fluids. These are guar-based fluids cross-linked with boron ions (from aqueous borax/boric acid solution). These gels have higher viscosity at pH 9 onwards and are used to carry proppants. After the fracturing job the pH is reduced to 3–4 so that the cross-links are broken and the gel is less viscous and can be pumped out.

•Organometallic-crosslinked fluids zirconium, chromium, antimony, titanium salts are known to crosslink the guar based gels. The crosslinking mechanism is not reversible. So once the proppant is pumped down along with the cross-linked gel, the fracturing part is done. The gels are broken down with appropriate breakers.

•Aluminium phosphate-ester oil gels. Aluminium phosphate and ester oils are slurried to form cross-linked gel. These are one of the first known gelling systems.

For slickwater it is common to include sweeps or a reduction in the proppant concentration temporarily to ensure the well is not overwhelmed with proppant causing a screen-off. As the fracturing process proceeds, viscosity reducing agents such as oxidizers and enzyme breakers are sometimes then added to the fracturing fluid to deactivate the gelling agents and encourage flowback. The oxidizer reacts with the gel to break it down, reducing the fluid’s viscosity and ensuring that no proppant is pulled from the formation.

An enzyme acts as a catalyst for the breaking down of the gel. Sometimes pH modifiers are used to break down the crosslink at the end of a hydraulic fracturing job, since many require a pH buffer system to stay viscous.  At the end of the job the well is commonly flushed with water (sometimes blended with a friction reducing chemical) under pressure.

Injected fluid is to some degree recovered and is managed by several methods, such as underground injection control, treatment and discharge, recycling, or temporary storage in pits or containers while new technology is being continually being developed and improved to better handle waste water and improve re-usability.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Save the Water fracking side banner


Water news archives – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here   Support Save the Water™ click here.

Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™ is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

World Water Day 2012 images

World Water Day 2012

World Water day
World water day 2012
World Water day
World water day
World water day 2012

Present and future generations must be educated in water sustainability issues. With proper funding Save the Water™ will provide that extensive instruction.

We respect the right of every individual to have access to safe and clean drinking water. Your financial support and generosity is needed help support our mission.

 

 help support STW save the water Paypal
Please make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc.
and mail to:
Save the Water Inc
500 SW 69th Terr.
Hollywood Florida 33023
To Donate A Gift-In-Kind Please
Contact Us
Help make children Florida’s No. 1 priority.

Top of page

Comments Off

Water education: Chlorine – Chlorine Dioxide – Chloramine – What are the differences? STEM – Water education research report part 3 of 3.

Save the water news education and water research postings

Save the Water™
Daily
News Brief

Courtesy of
Citizens Concerned
About Chloramine

EPA
Wikipedia Foundation
Sir Richard Branson
and is shared as
educational material.
AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

 
Rating for savethewater.org
 
A day in the life of a scientist
Waorldwater day every day

Water education news: Chlorine – chlorine dioxide – chloramine – what are the differences?

If this video does not load quickly please click the YOUTUBE in bottom right of video. This is an important video.


Chloramine facts: Shocking but true.

Chloramine: Toxic Showers and Baths: STW™ recommends to read this first.

“You Get More Toxic Exposure From Taking A Shower Than From
Drinking The Same Water.”

This article is courtesy of Citizens Concerned About Chloramine (CCAC), a nonprofit organization based in the San Francisco Bay Area, California.

…. Summary statement from a recent study at a major U.S. University and as reported in Science News, vol. 130.

Diagram adapted from the Weekly Newsmagazine of Science, SCIENCE NEWS.Chemistry VOL 130 no. 12 Pages 177-192
"You Get More Toxic Exposure From Taking A Shower Than From Drinking The Same Water."

In a new study, researcher Julian Andelman, of the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, the National Academy of Sciences has shown that volatile chemicals present in many municipal drinking water supplies are especially toxic to people when they are exposed to them when bathing or showering. “. . .the major health threat posed by these water pollutants is far more likely to be from their inhalation as air pollutants in the home, according to preliminary data from a study Andelman and his colleagues have just reported.”

“In the past, he says, inhalation exposure to water pollutants has largely been ignored.” His data indicates that hot showers can liberate between 50 to 80 percent of the dissolved chemicals into the air. Emissions from hot baths are half as high. “(One reason, explains Andelman, is that because water droplets dispersed by a shower head have a larger surface-to volume ratio than water streaming into a bath, more of the volatiles can vaporize out).”

It is interesting to note that chloramine actually exists in three forms: monochloramine, dichloramine, and trichloramine. The three forms constantly and rapidly shift from one form to another. “The different volatilities of the chloramines result in substantial differences in the rates of release from water: di- and tri-chloramine are released ~3 and 300 times faster than monochloramine, respectively.” (See page 3 of Chemicals in Drinking Water: Chloramine (PDF, 178 KB), by Scottish Centre for Infection and Environmental Health. Alternate source: click here.) These chemicals vaporize easily out of the water that is heated and aerosolized. All three forms are respiratory irritants, with trichloramine being the most toxic.

Andelman points out that.. . “Although showering can be an intense source of residential exposure to water pollutants, . . . it is far from the only important source. Andelman notes that only about 5 of the 50 to 70 gallons of water used daily by the average American goes for showers. Much of the rest is used by dishwashing and laundering. “

“Though actual doses will depend on many factors–especially the level of water contamination–the study does offer clues for limiting exposure. Cold showers can reduce the vaporization of dissolved volatile chemicals by 50 percent, Andelman says. And short showers help, since each doubling in shower time quadruples the dose from accumulating gases. Finally, to limit the spread of released gases into the rest of the home, he suggests closing the bathroom door while bathing and exhausting the room air outdoors.

“Science News, Vol. 130 no. 12, pgs. 177-192, cited by CCAC in this report.

Citizens Concerned About Chloramine (CCAC) 408 227-5767 Send an email to CCAC http://www.chloramine.org

 

Research in this issue

EPA data base for chloramines in drinking water
Basic information about chloramines and drinking water disinfection
Water systems, disinfection byproducts, and the use of monochloramine
Chloramines-related research
Common health questions related to monochloramine
More information about your drinking water
More information about chloramines and disinfection byproducts
Chloramine data by Wikipedia
Uses and chemical reactions
Reduction of organic chloramines
Uses in water treatment
Health risks
Removing chloramine from water
Situations where monochloramine is removed from water supplies
Organic chloramines

Part one and two of series

Water education research report: Chlorine-part 1 of 3
Water education research report: Chlorine dioxide-part 2 of 3.

Save the Water™© 2013/ 06/5/2013 / Anthony Kozuh / Research – Education .

In this last of our three part water education series: “Chlorine – Chlorine Dioxide – Chloramine – What are the differences?“, the chemical treatment chloramine is looked at. This article is not an opinion of STW™. It is shocking scientific fact. We recommend the video and first toggle be reviewed before going further. At the end of the article we have provided a complete education and news article directory of everything Save the Water™ has published over the past year.”Water education resource and news article directory with 5,450 links“. Water educators are welcome to utilize this information under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License with proper credit given.

EPA data base for chloramines in drinking water:

Chloramines are disinfectants used to treat drinking water. Chloramines are most commonly formed when ammonia is added to chlorine to treat drinking water. The typical purpose of chloramines is to provide longer-lasting water treatment as the water moves through pipes to consumers. This type of disinfection is known as secondary disinfection. Chloramines have been used by water utilities for almost 90 years, and their use is closely regulated. More than one in five Americans uses drinking water treated with chloramines. Water that contains chloramines and meets EPA regulatory standards is safe to use for drinking, cooking, bathing and other household uses.

Many utilities use chlorine as their secondary disinfectant; however, in recent years, some of them changed their secondary disinfectant to chloramines to meet disinfection byproduct regulations. In order to address questions that have been raised by consumers about this switch, EPA scientists and experts have answered 29 of the most frequently asked questions about chloramines. We have also worked with a risk communication expert to help us organize complex information and make it easier for us to express current knowledge.

The question and answer format takes a step-wise approach to communicate complex information to a wide variety of consumers who may have different educational backgrounds or interest in this topic. Each question is answered by three key responses, which are written at an approximately sixth grade reading level. In turn, each key response is supported by three more detailed pieces of information, which are written at an approximately 12th grade reading level. More complex information is provided in the Additional Supporting Information section, which includes links to documents and resources that provide additional technical information.

EPA continues to research drinking water disinfectants and expects to periodically evaluate and possibly update the questions and answers about chloramines when new information becomes available.

You may wish to view each question separately by clicking on the highlighted questions below or may wish to view them as one document.


Basic information about chloramines and drinking water disinfection


Water systems, disinfection byproducts, and the use of monochloramine


Chloramines-related research


Common health questions related to monochloramine

More information about your drinking water


More information about your drinking water

EPA strongly encourages people to learn more about their drinking water. Your water bill or telephone book’s government listings are a good starting point for local information. Water systems have several different choices when it comes to disinfection. To find out if chloramines are used in your community, contact your local water system.

EPA requires all community water systems to prepare an annual consumer confidence report (CCR) (sometimes called a water quality report) for their customers. The CCR lists the level of contaminants that have been detected over a certain period of time and shows how these levels compare with EPA’s drinking water regulations. Some water suppliers have posted their annual reports on EPA’s Website. If you have not received this annual report, and it is not posted on EPA’s Website, you may request it by calling your water system.

More information about chloramines and disinfection byproducts

More information about health effects and drinking water disinfection from EPA is available in the following locations:


2007 Version of Chloramines Q&A’s

EPA has updated the previous version of the Chloramines Q&A’s in order to better communicate complex issues to a wider audience. EPA expects to continue to review and possiblyupdate the Q&A’s on a periodic basis or as new information becomes available

Top of page

Top of page

Chloramine data by Wikipedia

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Wikipedia terms of use. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

Chloramines are derivatives of ammonia by substitution of one, two or three hydrogen atoms with chlorine atoms.[1] Monochloramine is an inorganic compound with the formula NH2Cl. It is an unstable colourless liquid at its melting point of -66° temperature, but it is usually handled as a dilute aqueous solution where it is used as a disinfectant. The term chloramine also refers to a family of organic compounds with the formulas R2NCl and RNCl2 (R is an organic group). Dichloramine, NHCl2, and nitrogen trichloride, NCl3, are also well known.

Uses and chemical reactions

NH2Cl is a key intermediate in the traditional synthesis of hydrazine.

Monochloramine oxidizes sulfhydryls and disulfides in the same manner as HClO,[4] but only possesses 0.4% of the biocidal effect of HClO.[5]

Reduction of organic chloramines

Chloramines are often an unwanted side product of oxidation reactions of organic compounds (with amino groups) with bleach. The reduction of chloramines back into amines can be carried out through a mild hydride donor. Sodium borohydride will reduce chloramines, but this reaction is greatly sped up with acid catalysis.

Uses in water treatment

See also: Chloramination

NH2Cl is commonly used in low concentrations as a secondary disinfectant in municipal water distribution systems as an alternative to chlorination. This application is increasing. Chlorine (sometimes referred to as free chlorine) is being displaced by chloramine, which is much more stable and does not dissipate from the water before it reaches consumers. NH2Cl also has a very much lower, however still present, tendency than free chlorine to convert organic materials into chlorocarbons such as chloroform and carbon tetrachloride. Such compounds have been identified as carcinogens and in 1979 the United States Environmental Protection Agency‎ began regulating their levels in U.S. drinking water. Furthermore, water treated with chloramine lacks the distinct chlorine odour of the gaseous treatment and so has improved taste. In swimming pools, chloramines are formed by the reaction of free chlorine with organic substances. Chloramines, compared to free chlorine, are both less effective as a sanitizer and more irritating to the eyes of swimmers. When swimmers complain of eye irritation from “too much chlorine” in a pool, the problem is typically a high level of chloramines.[citation needed] Pool test kits designed for use by homeowners are sensitive to both free chlorine and chloramines, which can be misleading.[citation needed]

Chloramine-treated water has a greenish cast; the source of the colour is uncertain. Pure water by contrast normally is blue.[citation needed] This greenish color may be observed by filling a white polyethylene bucket with chloraminated tap water and comparing it to chloramine-free water such as distilled water or a sample from a swimming pool.

Health risks

Adding chloramine to the water supply can increase exposure to lead in drinking water, especially in areas with older housing; this exposure can result in increased lead levels in the bloodstream and can pose a significant health risk.[6]

There is also evidence that exposure to chloramine can contribute to respiratory problems, including asthma, among swimmers.[7] Respiratory problems related to chloramine exposure are common and prevalent among competitive swimmers.[8]

Chloramine use, together with chlorine dioxide, ozone, and ultraviolet, have been described as public health concerns and an example of the outcome of poorly implemented environmental regulation.[citation needed] These methods of disinfection decrease the formation of regulated byproducts such as alkyl chloroforms, which has led to their widespread adoption. However, they can increase the formation of a number of less regulated cytotoxic and genotoxic byproducts, some of which pose greater health risks than the regulated chemicals,[9] causing such diseases as cancer, kidney disease, thyroid damage,[10] and birth defects.[11]

Removing chloramine from water

Chloramine can be removed from tap water by treatment with superchlorination (10 ppm or more of free chlorine, such as from a dose of sodium hypochlorite bleach or pool sanitizer) while maintaining a pH of about 7 (such as from a dose of hydrochloric acid). Hypochlorous acid from the free chlorine strips the ammonia from the chloramine, and the ammonia outgasses from the surface of the bulk water. This process takes about 24 hours for normal tap water concentrations of a few ppm of chloramine. Residual free chlorine can then be removed by exposure to bright sunlight for about 4 hours.

Boiling the water for 20 minutes will remove chloramine and ammonia. Additionally, many foods and drinks rapidly neutralize chloramine without the necessity of boiling (e.g., tea, coffee, chicken stock, orange juice, etc.). SFPUC determined that 1000 mg of Vitamin C (tablets purchased in a grocery store, crushed and mixed in with the bath water) remove chloramine completely in a medium size bathtub without significantly depressing pH. Shower attachments containing Vitamin C can be purchased on the Internet, as well as effervescent Vitamin C bath tablets. [12]

Situations where monochloramine is removed from water supplies

Many animals are sensitive to chloramine and it must be removed from water given to many animals in zoos. Aquarium owners remove the chloramine from their tap water because it is toxic to fish. Aging the water for a few days removes chlorine but not the more stable chloramine, which can be neutralised using products available at pet stores.

Chloramine must also be removed from the water prior to use in kidney dialysis machines, as it would come in contact with the bloodstream across a permeable membrane. However, since chloramine is neutralized by the digestive process, kidney dialysis patients can still safely drink chloramine-treated water.

Home brewers use reducing agents such as sodium metabisulfite or potassium metabisulfite to remove chloramine from brewing fermented beverages. Chloramine, like chlorine, can be removed by boiling. However the boiling time required to remove the chloramine is much longer than that of chlorine.[13] Residual sodium can cause off flavors in beer (See Brewing, Michael Lewis) so potassium metabisulfite is preferred.

Chloramine can be removed from bathwater and birthing tubs by adding 1000 mg of vitamin C (as the ascorbic acid form) to a medium size bathtub (about 40 gallons of water).[14]

Organic chloramines

A variety of organic chloramines are known and proven useful in organic synthesis. One example is N-chloromorpholine ClN(CH2CH2)2O, N-chloropiperidine, and N-chloroquinuclidinium chloride.[15]

Safety

US EPA regulations limit chloramine concentration to 4 parts per million (ppm). A typical target level in US public water supplies is 3 ppm. In order to meet EPA regulated limits on halogenated disinfection by-products, many utilities are switching from chlorination to chloramination. While chloramination produces fewer total halogenated disinfection by-products, it produces greater concentrations of unregulated iodinated disinfection by-products and N-nitrosodimethylamine.[16][17] Both iodinated disinfection by-products and N-nitrosodimethylamine have been shown to be genotoxic.[17]
Research references

Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?

“Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?”

WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

www.wholeworldwater.co

Top of page

 

The Dead Pelican

Water Facts: Water Education Banners

Save the Water™ (STW™) wish to thank our friends, supporters and those who work to educate in regards to the current global water crisis.
STW™ Research and education department wish to thank you and provide water fact banners for your site. You will find thirty water fact banners herein this post (One month). These banner facts are for you to utilize in any way that you deem will help educate your readers in regards to our global water crisis.
We ask but one thing: Please do not alternate the following, as it took many volunteers to provide this info.

1) Copy and paste image
2) Copy and paste the link (above or below) If you have a problem see #3
3) If you have a problem contact us and Anthony will guide you through your issues. We wish to assist any water education site. @954 226 7466

Water

Top of page

Top of page


Water news directory – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here
Support Save the Water™ click here.

Any donation no matter how small assists Save the Water™ in researching and publishing water education articles such as this. Your support is appreciated as STW™ relies on your assistance to continue each day providing you this information. Click here to help support Save the Water™
Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™ is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.


Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts

Vol. V
649
June 5, 2013

Water
Research

Crisis
Response

Humanitarian
Projects

Education
Daily News
DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS


A day in the life of a scientist
World Water Day Everyday

Water education resource and news article directory with 5,450 links

Save the Water™ is committed to the education of present and future generations to insure the protection and conservation of water. Without clean drinking water, no species plant, animal or human can be saved. We must insure that the water is not contaminated to the point where we can no longer drink it.

You will find 5,450 links to organizations that provide valuable information about water science, research, education and sanitation. The educational resource is extensive, it has been divided into categories listed below so you can navigate to pertinent information according to your needs. (Click on header or image to navigate). Below the education resource section is a directory to the complete STW™ site for research and teaching purposes. Whether you use these resources for research or education, we hope that you become part of the solution that will bring clean healthy water for all people regardless of their social or economic status.


Junior Resources


Save The Water And Junior Water Education
 

General Water Resource Index

Click here to go to water resource index

Fracking Infographics

Click Here to go to Fracking Infograhics

Tribal Water Resource Directory

Click here to go to Tribal Resource Directory


Intermediate Resources


Animated_book_worm

Chemical Facts

Click here to go to chemical facts

Microscopic Images

Click here to go to Microscopic images

Microorganism Videos

Click here to go to microscope videos


Senior Teaching Resources


STEM Senior water resourses

Water Facts

Click here to go to water facts

Fracking Defined

Click here to go to Fracking defined

Research and Post Archives

Click here to go to post archives


STEM water science education


Click here to go to STEM water science education


DILOS™ program

Click here to go to DILOS program

STEM K-8 water science videos

Click here to go to STEM water science videos K-8


DILOS™ field trip

Click here to go to Dilos Field Trip

STEM water infographics

CLick here to go to STEM water infographics


DILOS™ K-4 classroom presentation

Click here to go to DILOS CLASSROOM PRESENTATION

STEM K-4 water science music videos

Click here to go to STEM water science music videos

Directory to STW™ site – 850 pages of global water news, research and education.

Updated May 10, 2013
[Most current articles: left column]

All the Save the Water™ Static Pages

 

Current Postings / Updated May 10, 2013/ 750 articles and growing daily.

May 2013

February 2013

Comments Off

Water education: Chlorine – Chlorine Dioxide – Chloramine – What are the differences? STEM – Water education research report part 2 of 3.

Save the water news education and water research postings

Save the Water™
Daily
News Brief

Courtesy of
Sabre Companies
EPA
Wikipedia
Richard Branson
Save the Water™
shared as
educational material.
AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

 
Rating for savethewater.org
 
A day in the life of a scientist

Water education news: Chlorine – Chlorine Dioxide – Chloramine – What are the differences?

Chlorine dioxide
Save the Water™ © 2013 Special Education Issue / June 4, 2013 / Anthony Kozuh / Research – Education Dept.

Chlorine dioxide – part two of three

Research in this issue

Historical Background
Differentiating Factors
Molecular Properties & Oxidation
Effective Biocide
Applications
Define chlorine dioxide
Uses
Bleaching
Water chlorination
Other disinfection uses
Safety issues in water and supplements

Research report part 1 of 3.
Research report part 3 of 3.

Historical Background

Following education material is courtesy of The Sabre Companies.

The discovery of chlorine dioxide has largely been credited to Sir Humphrey Davy, who, in 1814, created the compound by mixing sulfuric acid with potassium chlorate. Since its discovery, researchers have found that chlorine dioxide shares some common characteristics with chlorine. Specifically, chlorine dioxide is a greenish-yellowish gas with a chlorine-like odor that is irritating to the eyes, nose, and throat. Apart from these very limited similarities, however, it has been learned that chlorine dioxide exhibits physical and chemical properties that are dramatically different from those of chlorine, even though it contains a chlorine atom in its molecular structure.

Differentiating Factors

One of the most important properties of chlorine dioxide that sets it apart from chlorine is its behavior when placed in water. Not only is chlorine dioxide 10 times more soluble in water than chlorine (3.01 grams/liter at 25 degrees C), it doesn’t hydrolyze when placed in solution. It remains as a “true” dissolved gas that retains its useful oxidative and biocidal properties throughout the entire 2 to 10 pH range. By way of contrast, chlorine dissociates when placed in water to form hypochlorous and hydrochloric acids. Hypochlorous acid is the primary biocide in solution, which dissociates to form hypochlorite ion with increasing pH. Hypochlorite ion is only from 1/20 to 1/300 as effective in controlling microbes as hypochlorous acid. Thus, chlorine can only be an effective biocide in systems with low pH. The high degree of solubility exhibited by chlorine dioxide in water has also been observed in a variety of organic materials, such as oils and solvents, thereby allowing for utilization of its unique oxidative and biocidal properties in a wide range of potential applications.

Molecular Properties & Oxidation

Chlorine dioxide is a small, volatile, and very strong molecule that reacts with other substances by way of oxidation rather than by substitution (i.e., chlorination). chlorine dioxide has lower oxidation strength than chlorine, but more than twice the oxidative capacity. Oxidation strength describes how strongly an oxidizer will react with an “oxidizable” substance. The higher its oxidation strength, the more substances the oxidant compound will react with. chlorine dioxide is comparatively weak, and has a lower oxidation potential than ozone, chlorine or even hypochlorous acid. Oxidation capacity refers to the number of electrons transferred during an oxidation or reduction reaction. The chlorine atom in the ClO2 molecule has an oxidation number of +4. For this reason ClO2 accepts 5 electrons when reduced to chloride ion. By way of comparison, ClO2 contains 263 percent ‘available chlorine,’ which is more than 2.5 times the oxidation capacity of chlorine.The Sabre Companies Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2) Animation

Because chlorine dioxide has lower oxidation strength, it is more selective in its reactions. Typically, chlorine dioxide will only react with compounds that have activated carbon bonds such as phenols, or with other active compounds like sulfides, cyanides, and reduced iron and manganese compounds. Chlorine is a more powerful oxidizer than chlorine dioxide, and will react with a wider variety of chemicals, including ammonia. This property limits its overall effectiveness as a biocide. Conversely, because chlorine dioxide has more oxidative capacity compared to ozone or chlorine, less chlorine dioxide is required to obtain an active residual concentration of the material when used as a disinfectant.

An Effective Biocide

The propensity of chlorine dioxide to react by oxidation rather than substitution makes it a useful alternative to chlorine in drinking water disinfection applications where the formation of potentially carcinogenic halogenated disinfection byproducts, such as trihalomethanes and halogenated acidic acids, is of concern. Additionally, chlorine dioxide does not produce significant amounts of aldehydes, ketons, keton acids, or other disinfection byproducts that originate from ozonation of water containing organic substances.

The reaction of ClO2 with microorganisms or other oxidizable substances takes place in two steps. In the first stage of the reaction, the ClO2 molecule accepts an electron and chlorite ion is formed (ClO2-). In the second stage, ClO2 accepts 4 electrons and chloride ion (Cl-) is formed.

The mechanism of action by which chlorine dioxide inactivates microorganisms is not entirely well understood. As a general matter, however, it is known that chlorine dioxide destroys microbes by attacking their cell walls (or viral envelopes) and interfering with essential protein formation. It is also known that chlorine dioxide is more effective against viruses than either chlorine or ozone. Furthermore, chlorine dioxide is known to be effective against hearty waterborne protozoans such as Giardia Lambia and Cryptosporidium, the causative agents of giardiasis and cryptosporidiosis, respectively. Since chlorine dioxide is an oxidative biocide, microorganisms cannot build up a resistance to it.

Applications

Because chlorine dioxide always exists as a true gas under standard conditions of temperature and pressure, whether in open air or dissolved in solution, its antimicrobial properties can be harnessed for either liquid or gaseous application. The “free radical” property of chlorine dioxide makes it particularly useful for addressing structural microbial contamination problems. Liquid chlorine dioxide solution can be applied directly to known areas of microbial contamination, or entire contaminated structures can be fumigated with the gas by simply stripping it back out of solution at the point of application. Once applied, chlorine dioxide quickly decays on its own to invisible, harmless concentrations of various sodium salts including chlorite, chlorate, and chloride ion.

Foregoing education material is courtesy of Copyright ©2010 The Sabre Companies LLC, All rights reserved. to learn more click here

Accepted definition of chlorine dioxide

Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Chlorine dioxide is a chemical compound with the formula ClO2. This yellowish-green gas crystallizes as bright orange crystals at −59 °C. As one of several oxides of chlorine, it is a potent and useful oxidizing agent used in water treatment and in bleaching.[2]

Uses

Chlorine dioxide is used primarily (>95%) for bleaching of wood pulp, and for the disinfection (called chlorination) of municipal drinking water.[10][11]:4-1[12]

Bleaching

Chlorine dioxide is sometimes used for bleaching of wood pulp in combination with chlorine, but it is used alone in ECF (elemental chlorine-free) bleaching sequences. It is used at moderately acidic pH (3.5 to 6). The use of chlorine dioxide minimizes the amount of organochlorine compounds produced.[13] Chlorine dioxide (ECF technology) currently is the most important bleaching method world wide. About 95% of all bleached Kraft pulp is made using chlorine dioxide in ECF bleaching sequences.[14]

Chlorine dioxide is also used for the bleaching of flour.

Water chlorination

The Niagara Falls, New York water treatment plant first used chlorine dioxide for drinking water treatment in 1944 for phenol destruction.[11]:4-17[12] Chlorine dioxide was introduced as a drinking water disinfectant on a large scale in 1956, when Brussels, Belgium, changed from chlorine to chlorine dioxide.[12] Its most common use in water treatment is as a pre-oxidant prior to chlorination of drinking water to destroy natural water impurities that produce trihalomethanes on exposure to free chlorine.[15][16][17] Trihalomethanes are suspect carcinogenic disinfection by-products[18] associated with chlorination of naturally occurring organics in the raw water.[17] Chlorine dioxide is also superior to chlorine when operating above pH 7,[11]:4-33 in the presence of ammonia and amines[citation needed] and/or for the control of biofilms in water distribution systems.[17] Chlorine dioxide is used in many industrial water treatment applications as a biocide including cooling towers, process water, and food processing.[19]

Chlorine dioxide is less corrosive than chlorine and superior for the control of legionella bacteria.[12][20] Chlorine dioxide is superior to some other secondary water disinfection methods in that chlorine dioxide: 1) is an EPA registered biocide, 2) is not negatively impacted by pH 3) does not lose efficacy over time (the bacteria will not grow resistant to it) and 4) is not negatively impacted by silica and phosphate, which are commonly used potable water corrosion inhibitors. Some unscrupulous biocide manufacturers will state that their product is EPA registered as a biocide. All EPA registered biocides must have a product label that is supplied with the product. This label will contain specifications as far as the product’s EPA registration. EPA will register certain products as a general biocide, but others will have specifications for what bacteria the product can protect against. For instance, although chlorine dioxide is a registered biocide, it is not registered to protect against Legionella. If a biocide is sold without an EPA approved biocide label that is because the product is not registered as an EPA approved biocide.

It is more effective as a disinfectant than chlorine in most circumstances against water borne pathogenic microbes such as viruses,[21] bacteria and protozoa – including the cysts of Giardia and the oocysts of Cryptosporidium.[11]:4-20–4-21

The use of chlorine dioxide in water treatment leads to the formation of the by-product chlorite, which is currently limited to a maximum of 1 ppm in drinking water in the USA.[11]:4-33 This EPA standard limits the use of chlorine dioxide in the USA to relatively high quality water or water, which is to be treated with iron based coagulants (Iron can reduce chlorite to chloride).[citation needed]

Other disinfection uses

It can also be used for air disinfection,[22] and was the principal agent used in the decontamination of buildings in the United States after the 2001 anthrax attacks.[23] After the disaster of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, Louisiana and the surrounding Gulf Coast, chlorine dioxide has been used to eradicate dangerous mold from houses inundated by the flood-water.[24] Sometimes it is used as a fumigant treatment to ‘sanitize’ fruits such as blueberries, raspberries, and strawberries that develop molds and yeast.

Chlorine dioxide is used for the disinfection of endoscopes, such as, under the trade name Tristel.[25] It is also available in a “trio” consisting of a preceding “pre-clean” with surfactant and a succeeding “rinse” with deionised water and low-level antioxidant.[26]

Chlorine dioxide also is used for control of zebra and quagga mussels in water intakes.[11]:4-34

Chlorine dioxide also was shown to be effective in bedbug eradication.[27]

Chlorine dioxide is used as an oxidant for phenol destruction in waste water streams and for odor control in the air scrubbers of animal byproduct (rendering) plants.[11]:4-34

Safety issues in water and supplements

Chlorine dioxide is toxic, hence limits on exposure to it are needed to ensure its safe use. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has set a maximum level of 0.8 mg/L for chlorine dioxide in drinking water.[28] Occupational Safety and Health Administration, OSHA, an agency of the United States Department of Labor has set a 8 hour permissible exposure limit of 0.1 ppm in air (0.3 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m(3))) for people working with chlorine dioxide.[29]

On July 30, 2010 and again on October 1, 2010, the United States Food and Drug Administration, FDA, warned against the use of the product “Miracle Mineral Supplement” or “MMS”, which when made up according to instructions produces chlorine dioxide. MMS has been marketed as a treatment for a variety of conditions, including HIV, cancer, and acne. The FDA warnings informed consumers that MMS can cause serious harm to health, and stated that it has received numerous reports of nausea, severe vomiting, and life-threatening low blood pressure caused by dehydration,[30][31] among other symptoms, such as diarrhea.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Research references

Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?

WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

www.wholeworldwater.co

Top of page

 

The Dead Pelican

Water Facts: Water Education Banners

Save the Water™ (STW™) wish to thank our friends, supporters and those who work to educate in regards to the current global water crisis.
STW™ Research and education department wish to thank you and provide water fact banners for your site. You will find thirty water fact banners herein this post (One month). These banner facts are for you to utilize in any way that you deem will help educate your readers in regards to our global water crisis.
We ask but one thing: Please do not alternate the following, as it took many volunteers to provide this info.

1) Copy and paste image
2) Copy and paste the link (above or below) If you have a problem see #3
3) If you have a problem contact us and Anthony will guide you through your issues. We wish to assist any water education site. @954 226 7466

Water

Top of page

Top of page


For more banners click here

Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts

Vol. V
648
June 4, 2013

Water
Research

Crisis
Response

Humanitarian
Projects

Education
Daily News
DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS


A day in the life of a scientist

Water education resource and news article directory with 5,450 links

Save the Water™ is committed to the education of present and future generations to insure the protection and conservation of water. Without clean drinking water, no species plant, animal or human can be saved. We must insure that the water is not contaminated to the point where we can no longer drink it.

You will find 5,450 links to organizations that provide valuable information about water science, research, education and sanitation. The educational resource is extensive, it has been divided into categories listed below so you can navigate to pertinent information according to your needs. (Click on header or image to navigate). Below the education resource section is a directory to the complete STW™ site for research and teaching purposes. Whether you use these resources for research or education, we hope that you become part of the solution that will bring clean healthy water for all people regardless of their social or economic status.


Junior Resources


Save The Water And Junior Water Education
 

General Water Resource Index

Click here to go to water resource index

Fracking Infographics

Click Here to go to Fracking Infograhics

Tribal Water Resource Directory

Click here to go to Tribal Resource Directory


Intermediate Resources


Animated_book_worm

Chemical Facts

Click here to go to chemical facts

Microscopic Images

Click here to go to Microscopic images

Microorganism Videos

Click here to go to microscope videos


Senior Teaching Resources


STEM Senior water resourses

Water Facts

Click here to go to water facts

Fracking Defined

Click here to go to Fracking defined

Research and Post Archives

Click here to go to post archives


STEM water science education


Click here to go to STEM water science education


DILOS™ program

Click here to go to DILOS program

STEM K-8 water science videos

Click here to go to STEM water science videos K-8


DILOS™ field trip

Click here to go to Dilos Field Trip

STEM water infographics

CLick here to go to STEM water infographics


DILOS™ K-4 classroom presentation

Click here to go to DILOS CLASSROOM PRESENTATION

STEM K-4 water science music videos

Click here to go to STEM water science music videos

Directory to STW™ site – 850 pages of global water news, research and education.

Updated May 10, 2013
[Most current articles: left column]

All the Save the Water™ Static Pages

 

Current Postings / Updated May 10, 2013/ 750 articles and growing daily.

May 2013

February 2013

January 2013

December 2012

Current Posts

November 2012

Current Postings

    October 2012

  • Contaminated drinking water: Risk of viral acute gastrointestinal illness from nondisinfected drinking water distribution systems.
  • Water news: Clean Water Act turns 40.
  • Water news: India – Pictorial – Chand Baori step well in Rajasthan, India. In a country plagued with a water crisis a wondrous water history lays hidden.
  • Water news: India – WaterFilters.NET provides aid during global water crisis.
  • Haritika / STW™ Humanitarian Partnership
  • Contaminated water: EPA Finalizes cleanup plan for Shenandoah Road Superfund Site in East Fishkill, New York.
  • Drinking water: Drinking water problem – the case against water fluoridation.
  • Water crisis: India – Quenching the thirst of a growing nation.
  • Plant Based Plastics
  • Water contamination: New Report confirms fracking is reckless.
  • Contaminated drinking water: VA denies most compensation claims from toxic water wells – Marine veterans left to their own resources.
  • Contaminated water: Waterkeepers take legal action to stop toxic coal ash from contaminating groundwater.
  • Water crisis: Africa – Byo water crisis: Churches warn of violent protests – Bulawayo’s taps tightened as water shortage bites.
  • Contaminated water: EPA changes cleanup plan for polluted ground water at South Plainfield superfund site.
  • Water crisis: Death of Arizona’s largest lake affects San Carlos Apache Tribe – In depth fact and history report.
  • Contaminated water: Waukesha’s evolving quest for clean water turns attention to Root River.
  • All the Categories

     

    September 2012 Water News Artices

    August 2012 Water News Articles

    March-July 2012 Posts

    a day in the life of a scientistWorld water dayWorld water day

    Top of page

    Present and future generations must be educated in water sustainability issues. With proper funding Save the Water™ will provide that extensive instruction.

    We respect the right of every individual to have access to safe and clean drinking water. Your financial support and generosity is needed help support our mission.

     help support STW save the water Paypal
    Please make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc.
    and mail to:
    Save the Water Inc
    500 SW 69th Terr.
    Hollywood Florida 33023
    To Donate A Gift-In-Kind Please
    Contact Us
    Help make children Florida’s No. 1 priority.

    Top of page

    Leave a comment

    Water education: Chlorine – Chlorine Dioxide – Chloramine – What are the differences? STEM – Water education research report part 1 of 3.

    Save the water news education and water research postings

    Save the Water™
    Daily
    News Brief

    Courtesy of
    EPA
    Wikipedia Foundation
    Sir Richard Branson
    Save the Water™
    Water Education
    and is shared as
    educational material only.
    AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

     
    Rating for savethewater.org
     
    A day in the life of a scientist
    Waorldwater day every day

    Water education news: Chlorine – Chlorine Dioxide – Chloramine – What are the differences?

    chlorine definition
    Save the Water™ © 2013 Special Education Issue / June 3, 2013 / Anthony Kozuh / Research – Education Dept.

    Chlorine – part one of three

    Research in this issue

    EPA Defines chlorine
    History of chlorine
    Scientific definition
    Health Hazard Information
    Acute Effects
    Chronic Effects (Noncancer)
    Reproductive/Developmental Effects
    Cancer Risk
    Science research material
    Physical characteristics of chlorine and its compounds
    Chemical characteristics
    Isotopes

    Research report part 2 of 3.
    Research report part 3 of 3.

    EPA Defines chlorine

    Chlorine is a strong oxidant commonly used in water treatment for oxidation and disinfection. As an oxidant, chlorine is applied to control biological growth and to remove color, taste and odor compounds, iron and manganese, and other dissolved inorganic contaminants such as arsenic. As a primary disinfectant, chlorine is applied to disinfect and to control microbial activity in the distribution system. It is also used as a secondary disinfectant after chlorine, ozone, UV irradiation, or chlorine dioxide. Chlorine is commonly applied at one or two points during treatment. Downstream residual chlorine concentrations make chlorination concurrent with other treatment processes. Figure 1 shows multiple possible chlorine (Cl2) application points during conventional treatment. Chlorine residuals are common during filtration to inhibit microbial (biofilm) growth on filter media that could increase filter head loss (pressure) build up.

    Chlorine is available as compressed elemental gas, sodium hypochlorite solution (NaOCl) or solid calcium hypochlorite (Ca(OCl)2). All forms of chlorine, when applied to water, form hypochlorous acid (HOCl). Gaseous chlorine acidifies the water and reduces the alkalinity, whereas the liquid and solid forms of chlorine increase the pH and the alkalinity at the application point. The pH of the water will affect the dominating chlorine species such that HOCl dominates at lower pH, while the hypochlorite ion (OCl-) dominates at higher pH. Of the two species, HOCl is the stronger oxidant. Therefore, chlorine is more effective as an oxidant and a disinfectant at lower pH. Both forms, HOCl and OCl-, are referred to as free chlorine.

    The concentration (C), contact time (T), pH and temperature affect the effectiveness of chlorine application.  CHLORINEThe product of concentration and time (CT) is the most important operational parameter in disinfection and inactivation. Although increasing the dose increases the ability of chlorine to oxidize and disinfect, it may also lead to taste and odor issues and to the formation of disinfection byproducts (DBPs) by chlorine’s reaction with natural organic matter (NOM). The dose is also affected by the application point, chlorine demand of the water, and desired residual concentration. Total organic carbon (TOC) and ultraviolet absorbance (UV) are two measures of DBP-reactive NOM and of chlorine demand. Information courtesy of EPA Drinking Water Treatability Database

    EPA Contaminants treated by chlorine

    EPA Research references

    History

    Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. The most common compound of chlorine, sodium chloride, has been known since ancient times; archaeologists have found evidence that rock salt was used as early as 3000 BC and brine as early as 6000 BC.[21] Around 1630, chlorine was recognized as a gas by the Belgian chemist and physician Jan Baptist van Helmont.[22]

    Elemental chlorine was first prepared and studied in 1774 by Swedish chemist Carl Wilhelm Scheele, and, therefore, he is credited for its discovery.[23] He called it “dephlogisticated muriatic acid air” since it is a gas (then called “airs”) and it came from hydrochloric acid (then known as “muriatic acid”).[23] However, he failed to establish chlorine as an element, mistakenly thinking that it was the oxide obtained from the hydrochloric acid (see phlogiston theory).[23] He named the new element within this oxide as muriaticum.[23] Regardless of what he thought, Scheele did isolate chlorine by reacting MnO2 (as the mineral pyrolusite) with HCl:[22]

    4 HCl + MnO2 → MnCl2 + 2 H2O + Cl2

    Scheele observed several of the properties of chlorine: the bleaching effect on litmus, the deadly effect on insects, the yellow green color, and the smell similar to aqua regia.[24]

    At the time, common chemical theory was: any acid is a compound that contains oxygen (still sounding in the German and Dutch names of oxygen: sauerstoff or zuurstof, both translating into English as acid stuff), so a number of chemists, including Claude Berthollet, suggested that Scheele’s dephlogisticated muriatic acid air must be a combination of oxygen and the yet undiscovered element, muriaticum.[25][26][27]

    In 1809, Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac and Louis-Jacques Thénard tried to decompose dephlogisticated muriatic acid air by reacting it with charcoal to release the free element muriaticum (and carbon dioxide).[23] They did not succeed and published a report in which they considered the possibility that dephlogisticated muriatic acid air is an element, but were not convinced.[28]

    In 1810, Sir Humphry Davy tried the same experiment again, and concluded that it is an element, and not a compound.[23] He named this new element as chlorine, from the Greek word χλωρος (chlōros), meaning green-yellow.[29] The name halogen, meaning “salt producer,” was originally used for chlorine in 1811 by Johann Salomo Christoph Schweigger. However, this term was later used as a generic term to describe all the elements in the chlorine family (fluorine, bromine, iodine), after a suggestion by Jöns Jakob Berzelius in 1842.[30][31] In 1823, Michael Faraday liquefied chlorine for the first time,[32][33] and demonstrated that what was then known as “solid chlorine” had a structure of chlorine hydrate (Cl2•H2O).[22]

    Chlorine gas was first used by French chemist Claude Berthollet to bleach textiles in 1785.[34][35] Modern bleaches resulted from further work by Berthollet, who first produced sodium hypochlorite in 1789 in his laboratory in the town of Javel (now part of Paris, France), by passing chlorine gas through a solution of sodium carbonate. The resulting liquid, known as “Eau de Javel” (“Javel water“), was a weak solution of sodium hypochlorite. However, this process was not very efficient, and alternative production methods were sought. Scottish chemist and industrialist Charles Tennant first produced a solution of calcium hypochlorite (“chlorinated lime”), then solid calcium hypochlorite (bleaching powder).[34] These compounds produced low levels of elemental chlorine, and could be more efficiently transported than sodium hypochlorite, which remained as dilute solutions because when purified to eliminate water, it became a dangerously powerful and unstable oxidizer. Near the end of the nineteenth century, E. S. Smith patented a method of sodium hypochlorite production involving electrolysis of brine to produce sodium hydroxide and chlorine gas, which then mixed to form sodium hypochlorite.[36] This is known as the chloralkali process, first introduced on an industrial scale in 1892, and now the source of essentially all modern elemental chlorine and sodium hydroxide production (a related low-temperature electrolysis reaction, the Hooker process, is now responsible for bleach and sodium hypochlorite production).

    Elemental chlorine solutions dissolved in chemically basic water (sodium and calcium hypochlorite) were first used as anti-putrification agents and disinfectants in the 1820s, in France, long before the establishment of the germ theory of disease. This work is mainly due to Antoine-Germain Labarraque, who adapted Berthollet’s “Javel water” bleach and other chlorine preparations for the purpose (see a more complete history, see below). Elemental chlorine has since served a continuous function in topical antisepsis (wound irrigation solutions and the like) as well as public sanitation (especially of swimming and drinking water). In 1826, silver chloride was used to produce photographic images for the first time.[37] Chloroform was first used as an anesthetic in 1847.[37]

    Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) was invented in 1912, initially without a purpose.[37]Chlorine gas was first introduced as a weapon on April 22, 1915, at Ypres by the German Army,[38][39] and the results of this weapon were disastrous because gas masks had not been mass distributed and were tricky to get on quickly.

    Chlorine definition as accepted today

    Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Chlorine is a chemical element with symbol Cl and atomic number 17. Chlorine is in the halogen group (17) and is the second lightest halogen after fluorine. The element is a yellow-green gas under standard conditions, where it forms diatomic molecules. It has the highest electron affinity and the third highest electronegativity of all the elements; for this reason, chlorine is a strong oxidizing agent. Free chlorine is rare on Earth, and is usually a result of direct or indirect oxidation by oxygen.

    The most common compound of chlorine, sodium chloride, has been known since ancient times. Around 1630 chlorine gas was first synthesized in a chemical reaction, but not recognized as a fundamentally important substance. Characterization of chlorine gas was made in 1774 by Carl Wilhelm Scheele, who supposed it an oxide of a new element. In 1809 chemists suggested that the gas might be a pure element, and this was confirmed by Sir Humphry Davy in 1810, who named it from Ancient Greek: χλωρóς khlôros “pale green”.

    Nearly all chlorine in the Earth’s crust occurs as chloride in various ionic compounds, including table salt. It is the second most abundant halogen and 21st most abundant chemical element in Earth’s crust. Elemental chlorine is commercially produced from brine by electrolysis. The high oxidizing potential of elemental chlorine led commercially to free chlorine’s bleaching and disinfectant uses, as well as its many uses of an essential reagent in the chemical industry. Chlorine is used in the manufacture of a wide range of consumer products, about two-thirds of them organic chemicals such as polyvinyl chloride, as well as many intermediates for production of plastics and other end products which do not contain the element. As a common disinfectant, elemental chlorine and chlorine-generating compounds are used more directly in swimming pools to keep them clean and sanitary.

    In the form of chloride ions, chlorine is necessary to all known species of life. Other types of chlorine compounds are rare in living organisms, and artificially produced chlorinated organics range from inert to toxic. In the upper atmosphere, chlorine-containing organic molecules such as chlorofluorocarbons have been implicated in ozone depletion. Small quantities of elemental chlorine are generated by oxidation of chloride to hypochlorite in neutrophils, as part of the immune response against bacteria. Elemental chlorine at high concentrations is extremely dangerous and poisonous for all living organisms, and was historically used in World War I as the first gaseous chemical warfare agent.

    Wikipedia research references to forgoing history and current definition

    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this information, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

    Health Hazard Information

    Acute Effects:

    • Chlorine is a potent irritant in humans to the eyes, the upper respiratory tract, and the lungs. Several acute (short-term) studies have reported the following effects: tickling of the nose at 0.014 to 0.054 parts per million (ppm); tickling of the throat at 0.04 to 0.097 ppm; itching of the nose and cough, stinging, or dryness of the nose and throat at 0.06 to 0.3 ppm; burning of the conjunctiva and pain after 15 minutes at 0.35 to 0.72 ppm; and discomfort ranging from ocular and respiratory irritation to coughing, shortness of breath, and headaches above 1.0 ppm. (4)
    • Higher levels of chlorine have resulted in the following effects in humans: mild mucous membrane irritation at 1 to 3 ppm; chest pain, vomiting, dypsnea, and cough at 30 ppm; and toxic pneumonitis and pulmonary edema at 46 to 60 ppm. (3)
    • Chlorine is extremely irritating to the skin and can cause severe burns in humans. (3)
    • Acute animal tests in rats and mice have shown chlorine to have high acute toxicity via inhalation. (6)

    Chronic Effects (Noncancer):

    • Workers chronically exposed to chlorine gas have exhibited respiratory effects, such as eye and throat irritation, and airflow obstruction. (8)
    • Animal studies have reported decreased body weight gain, eye and nose irritation, and nonneoplastic lesions and respiratory epithelial hyperplasia from chronic inhalation exposure to chlorine. (4,8)
    • The Reference Dose (RfD) for chlorine is 0.1 milligrams per kilogram body weight per day (mg/kg/d) based on no observed adverse effects in rats. The RfD is an estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude) of a daily oral exposure to the human population (including sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be without appreciable risk of deleterious noncancer effects during a lifetime. It is not a direct estimator of risk but rather a reference point to gauge the potential effects. At exposures increasingly greater than the RfD, the potential for adverse health effects increases. Lifetime exposure above the RfD does not imply that an adverse health effect would necessarily occur. (2)
    • EPA has medium confidence in the RfD based on (1) medium to high confidence in the principal study because relevant endpoints in two animal species were examined after prolonged exposure by an appropriate route, but an effect level was not observed in this study and higher levels may not be practicable due to taste aversion, and (2) medium confidence in the database because information is available for rats and mice on the noncarcinogenic toxicity of oral exposure to chlorine for subchronic periods. Developmental and reproductive toxicity of chlorine have been examined in rats and mice, but with suboptimal studies; due to the chemical relationship between chlorine and monochloramine, reproductive and developmental studies for monochloramine may be used to satisfy data gaps for chlorine. (2)
    • EPA has not established a Reference Concentration (RfC) for chlorine. (2)
    • CalEPA has established a chronic reference exposure level of 0.00006 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) based on respiratory epithelial lesions in rats. The CalEPA reference exposure level is a concentration at or below which adverse health effects are not likely to occur. (8)

    Reproductive/Developmental Effects:

    • No information is available on the developmental or reproductive effects of chlorine in humans or animals via inhalation exposure.
    • Animal studies have demonstrated no evidence of reproductive or developmental effects from ingestion exposure to chlorine. (2)
    • Since chlorine is highly reactive, uptake at sites such as the ovaries and testes which are remote from the respiratory tract, is anticipated to be minimal. (2)

    Cancer Risk:

    • No information is available on the carcinogenic effects of chlorine in humans from inhalation exposure.
    • Several human studies have investigated the relationship between exposure to chlorinated drinking water and cancer. These studies were not designed to assess whether chlorine itself causes cancer, but whether trihalomethanes or other organic compounds occurring in drinking water as a result of chlorination are associated with an increased risk of cancer. These studies show an association between bladder and rectal cancer and chlorination byproducts in drinking water. (5)
    • An NTP study reported no evidence of carcinogenic activity in male rats or male and female mice, and equivocal evidence, based on an increase in mononuclear cell leukemia, in female rats, from ingestion of chlorinated or chloraminated water. (9)
    • EPA has not classified chlorine for carcinogenicity. (2)

    EPA research reference

    Chlorine: Further science research material

    Chlorine
    17Cl
    F

    Cl

    Br
    sulfurchlorineargon
    Appearance
    pale yellow-green gas
    General properties
    Name, symbol, number chlorine, Cl, 17
    Pronunciation /ˈklɔərn/ KLOHR-een
    or /ˈklɔərɨn/ KLOHR-ən
    Element category halogen
    Group, period, block 17 (halogens), 3, p
    Standard atomic weight 35.45(1)
    Electron configuration [Ne] 3s2 3p5
    2, 8, 7

    Electron shells of chlorine (2, 8, 7)
    History
    Discovery Carl Wilhelm Scheele (1774)
    First isolation Carl Wilhelm Scheele (1774)
    Recognized as an element by Humphry Davy (1808)
    Physical properties
    Phase gas
    Density (0 °C, 101.325 kPa)
    3.2 g/L
    Liquid density at b.p. 1.5625[1] g•cm−3
    Melting point 171.6 K, -101.5 °C, -150.7 °F
    Boiling point 239.11 K, -34.04 °C, -29.27 °F
    Critical point 416.9 K, 7.991 MPa
    Heat of fusion (Cl2) 6.406 kJ•mol−1
    Heat of vaporization (Cl2) 20.41 kJ•mol−1
    Molar heat capacity (Cl2)
    33.949 J•mol−1•K−1
    Vapor pressure
    P (Pa) 1 10 100 1 k 10 k 100 k
    at T (K) 128 139 153 170 197 239
    Atomic properties
    Oxidation states 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, -1
    (strongly acidic oxide)
    Electronegativity 3.16 (Pauling scale)
    Ionization energies
    (more)
    1st: 1251.2 kJ•mol−1
    2nd: 2298 kJ•mol−1
    3rd: 3822 kJ•mol−1
    Covalent radius 102±4 pm
    Van der Waals radius 175 pm
    Miscellanea
    Crystal structure orthorhombic

    Chlorine has a orthorhombic crystal structure
    Magnetic ordering diamagnetic[2]
    Electrical resistivity (20 °C) > 10 Ω•m
    Thermal conductivity 8.9×10−3 W•m−1•K−1
    Speed of sound (gas, 0 °C) 206 m•s−1
    CAS registry number 7782-50-5
    Most stable isotopes
    Main article: Isotopes of chlorine
    iso NA half-life DM DE (MeV) DP
    35Cl 75.77% 35Cl is stable with 18 neutrons
    36Cl trace 3.01×105 y β 0.709 36Ar
    ε - 36S
    37Cl 24.23% 37Cl is stable with 20 neutrons

    r

    Chlorine is a chemical element with symbol Cl and atomic number 17. Chlorine is in the halogen group (17) and is the second lightest halogen after fluorine. The element is a yellow-green gas under standard conditions, where it forms diatomic molecules. It has the highest electron affinity and the third highest electronegativity of all the elements; for this reason, chlorine is a strong oxidizing agent. Free chlorine is rare on Earth, and is usually a result of direct or indirect oxidation by oxygen.

    The most common compound of chlorine, sodium chloride, has been known since ancient times. Around 1630 chlorine gas was first synthesized in a chemical reaction, but not recognized as a fundamentally important substance. Characterization of chlorine gas was made in 1774 by Carl Wilhelm Scheele, who supposed it an oxide of a new element. In 1809 chemists suggested that the gas might be a pure element, and this was confirmed by Sir Humphry Davy in 1810, who named it from Ancient Greek: χλωρóς khlôros “pale green”.

    Nearly all chlorine in the Earth’s crust occurs as chloride in various ionic compounds, including table salt. It is the second most abundant halogen and 21st most abundant chemical element in Earth’s crust. Elemental chlorine is commercially produced from brine by electrolysis. The high oxidizing potential of elemental chlorine led commercially to free chlorine’s bleaching and disinfectant uses, as well as its many uses of an essential reagent in the chemical industry. Chlorine is used in the manufacture of a wide range of consumer products, about two-thirds of them organic chemicals such as polyvinyl chloride, as well as many intermediates for production of plastics and other end products which do not contain the element. As a common disinfectant, elemental chlorine and chlorine-generating compounds are used more directly in swimming pools to keep them clean and sanitary.

    In the form of chloride ions, chlorine is necessary to all known species of life. Other types of chlorine compounds are rare in living organisms, and artificially produced chlorinated organics range from inert to toxic. In the upper atmosphere, chlorine-containing organic molecules such as chlorofluorocarbons have been implicated in ozone depletion. Small quantities of elemental chlorine are generated by oxidation of chloride to hypochlorite in neutrophils, as part of the immune response against bacteria. Elemental chlorine at high concentrations is extremely dangerous and poisonous for all living organisms, and was historically used in World War I as the first gaseous chemical warfare agent.

    Physical characteristics of chlorine and its compounds

    At standard temperature and pressure, two chlorine atoms form the diatomic molecule Cl2.[3] This is a yellow-green gas that has a distinctive strong odor, familiar to most from common household bleach.[4] The bonding between the two atoms is relatively weak (only 242.580 ± 0.004 kJ/mol), which makes the Cl2 molecule highly reactive. The boiling point at regular atmosphere is around −34 ˚C, but it can be liquefied at room temperature with pressures above 740 kPa.[5]

    Although elemental chlorine is yellow-green, chloride ion, in common with other halide ions, has no color in either minerals or solutions (example, table salt). Similarly, (again as with other halogens) chlorine atoms impart no color to organic chlorides when they replace hydrogen atoms in colorless organic compounds, such as tetrachloromethane. The melting point and density of these compounds is increased by substitution of hydrogen in place of chlorine. Compounds of chlorine with other halogens, however, as well as many chlorine oxides, are visibly colored.

    Chemical characteristics

    Along with fluorine, bromine, iodine, and astatine, chlorine is a member of the halogen series that forms the group 17 (formerly VII, VIIA, or VIIB) of the periodic table. Chlorine forms compounds with almost all of the elements to give compounds that are usually called chlorides. Chlorine gas reacts with most organic compounds, and will even sluggishly support the combustion of hydrocarbons.[6]

    Isotopes

    Chlorine has a wide range of isotopes. The two stable isotopes are 35Cl (75.77%) and 37Cl (24.23%).[19] Together they give chlorine an atomic weight of 35.4527 g/mol. The half-integer value for chlorine’s weight caused some confusion in the early days of chemistry, when it had been postulated that atoms were composed of even units of hydrogen (see Proust’s law), and the existence of chemical isotopes was unsuspected.[20]

    Trace amounts of radioactive 36Cl exist in the environment, in a ratio of about 7×10−13 to 1 with stable isotopes. 36Cl is produced in the atmosphere by spallation of 36Ar by interactions with cosmic ray protons. In the subsurface environment, 36Cl is generated primarily as a result of neutron capture by 35Cl or muon capture by 40Ca. 36Cl decays to 36S and to 36Ar, with a combined half-life of 308,000 years. The half-life of this hydrophilic nonreactive isotope makes it suitable for geologic dating in the range of 60,000 to 1 million years. Additionally, large amounts of 36Cl were produced by irradiation of seawater during atmospheric detonations of nuclear weapons between 1952 and 1958. The residence time of 36Cl in the atmosphere is about 1 week. Thus, as an event marker of 1950s water in soil and ground water, 36Cl is also useful for dating waters less than 50 years before the present. 36Cl has seen use in other areas of the geological sciences, including dating ice and sediments.[19]

    Research references

    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this information , you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Top of page

    “Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?”

    WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
    We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

    www.wholeworldwater.co

     

    The Dead Pelican

    Water Facts: Water Education Banners

    Save the Water™ (STW™) wish to thank our friends, supporters and those who work to educate in regards to the current global water crisis.
    STW™ Research and education department wish to thank you and provide water fact banners for your site. You will find thirty water fact banners herein this post (One month). These banner facts are for you to utilize in any way that you deem will help educate your readers in regards to our global water crisis.
    We ask but one thing: Please do not alternate the following, as it took many volunteers to provide this info.

    1) Copy and paste image
    2) Copy and paste the link (above or below) If you have a problem see #3
    3) If you have a problem contact us and Anthony will guide you through your issues. We wish to assist any water education site. @954 226 7466

    Water

    Top of page

    Top of page


    For more banners click here


    Water news directory – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here
    Support Save the Water™ click here.

    Any donation no matter how small assists Save the Water™ in researching and publishing water education articles such as this. Your support is appreciated as STW™ relies on your assistance to continue each day providing you this information. Click here to help support Save the Water™
    Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™
    is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

    Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts

    Vol. V
    647
    June 3, 2013

    Water
    Research

    Crisis
    Response

    Humanitarian
    Projects

    Education
    Daily News
    DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS


    A day in the life of a scientist
    World Water Day Everyday

    Comments Off

    Water contamination news: TCE – More tainted wells in Washington County will now need filters – Water education – TCE exposure linked to increased risk of some cancers.

    Save the water news education and water research postings

    Save the Water™
    Daily
    News Brief

    Courtesy of
    www.sciencedaily.com
    Jim Anderson
    Star Tribune
    Save the Water™
    Water Education
    and is shared as
    educational material only.
    AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

     
     
    Rating for savethewater.org

    Water contamination news: TCE

    TCE exposure

    More tainted wells in Washington County will now need filters.

    Article by: Jim Anderson / Star Tribune

    Residents of Baytown and West Lakeland townships, and a few in Bayport, have been living for years with wells tainted by trichloroethylene (TCE), but now the level at which the cancer-linked contaminant is considered dangerous has been lowered.

    With the new TCE standard, the Minnesota Department of Health is taking action to protect more residents who are now considered at-risk, including a requirement that more filters be installed on private wells that supply drinking water. Dozens of wells at homes in the rolling hills, rural subdivisions and hobby farms in the three communities near the St. Croix River are fitted with granular-activated carbon filters to strain out the chemical — and the filters are 100 percent effective, the Health Department said.

    The new standard means that about 115 more residents will be notified that they need filters, said Kevin Mustonen, project leader with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Superfund Remediation Division. The contamination area, comprising about 7 square miles, has been a state and federal Superfund site for about 20 years.

    The Pollution Control Agency has been monitoring about 600 wells in the area, and about 430 have detectable levels of TCE, he said. “This issue is not new to Baytown,” said Kent Grandlienard, chairman of the township board. “Our focus in the last 10 years has been about educating both our current residents and future people who are building here because previously, people were not really informed that there was an issue.”

    The township passed an ordinance requiring that all new wells be tested, and when a property is sold, information about the wells is required to be disclosed in the deed when it’s transferred to a new owner. “Our ordinance is actually working quite well,” Grandlienard added. “But again, this is people’s drinking water, so there may be some concern, especially by people who may not be aware of the issue.”

    The Health Department is now recommending that people don’t drink water containing more than 0.4 micrograms per liter of TCE for extended periods of time, said Kate Sande, toxicologist with the department. The former standard was 5 micrograms per liter. (Micrograms per liter are the equivalent of parts per billion. One part per billion is about one drop in an Olympic-sized swimming pool.)

    The Health Department continually evaluates its risk assessments for chemicals that have found their way into the environment, Sande said. The change is partly based on updated studies showing that TCE can disrupt immune systems and lead to some types of cancers at lower doses than previously thought.

    Sande said the new studies also were able to better gauge the effects of TCE based on more variables such as age and body weight, which means that fetuses, infants and young children could be more sensitive to TCE than previously thought. The change in the standard should not be cause for alarm, she added, “because we do have protections built into our guidance values.”

    The 0.4 level represents a conservative standard by which every person exposed to TCE would never see an adverse health effect. Even at five times that level (2 micrograms per liter), the risk is negligible. Risks vary, she added, based on factors such as age, weight and length of exposure.

    People at risk do need to take precautions, Sande said. Besides the filters, which have been found to be effective regardless of the TCE level, areas where water is used, such as showers and laundry rooms, should be well-ventilated because TCE moves easily from water to air. Aside from affecting immune systems and potentially causing heart defects in fetuses, TCE has been linked to kidney cancer, liver cancer and non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

    Cause and effect?

    The Health Department is evaluating whether there is an increased incidence of these cancers in the contaminated area, said John Soler, epidemiologist with the Health Department’s Minnesota Cancer Surveillance System, which tracks every case of the disease. “I suspect that we’re not going to find anything,” Soler said. “It probably looks like every other place.”

    Connecting the cause-effect dots of a disease such as cancer is difficult, he said, because of so many unknown variables. Smoking, in particular, is the major X-factor because it is linked to so many types of cancers, including one-third of kidney cancers. “The real problem is there’s a lot of cancer out there, and there’s a lot of things that cause it,” Soler said.

    Used in machine shops

    TCE was once commonly used as a solvent in machine shops to remove grease, said the Pollution Control Agency’s Mustonen. The TCE in Baytown and West Lakeland townships was found in 1987 when residential wells were sampled. After years of investigation, the source of the pollution was traced to Neilsen Products Co., a metal shop in operation from about 1940 to 1968 that made specialized tools and equipment for the tire retreading industry. The site is in Lake Elmo where Hagberg’s Country Market now stands.

    From there, the plume of underground contamination affecting four aquifers flows east toward the St. Croix. “That was just the state of practice at that time for disposing of chemicals and solvents, to just pour them down the drain or dump them out the back door when you were through with them,” Mustonen said. “That’s what everybody did — there just wasn’t an understanding of what happened to those chemicals after they were dumped or where they would wind up.”

    Although the groundwater flows into the St. Croix, TCE has not shown up in the river at levels that cause concern, Mustonen said. The chemical is pretty well diluted by that point. The Pollution Control Agency is pumping out and treating water at the Neilsen site to reduce TCE levels further, he said.

    Because it was originally thought that the Lake Elmo Airport was the source of TCE, the state, by way of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, bore the cost of installing and maintaining the private well filtering systems on property platted before 2002. After that date, property owners have been responsible.

    A filter system costs about $2,000 to install, Mustonen added, and it costs about $1,000 to change the filters every three to six years.

    Jim Anderson • 651-925-5039 Twitter: @StribJAnderson /© 2013 Star Tribune

    TCE exposure linked to increased risk of some cancers.

    www.sciencedaily.com

    Trichloroethylene (TCE) exposure has possible links to increased liver cancer risk, and the relationship between TCE exposure and risks of cancers of low incidence and those with confounding by lifestyle and other factors need further study, according to a study published May 30 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

    TCE is a chlorinated dry-cleaning solvent and degreaser that has been widely used for approximately the last 100 years and has shown carcinogenicity in rodents. Previous epidemiologic studies have shown a reported increase in cancer risk in humans for the kidney, cervix, liver and biliary passages, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

    In order to determine the link between TCE exposure and increased cancer risk, Johnni Hansen, Ph.D., of the Danish Cancer Society Research Center in Copenhagen, and colleagues looked at a cohort of workers that had individual documentation for exposure to TCE in Finland, Sweden, and Denmark, where the individuals were monitored for urinary TCE metabolite trichloroacetic acid during 1947-1989 and followed for cancer.

    The researchers found statistically significant elevated standardized incidence ratios for primary liver cancer and cervical cancer, but did not find a statistically significant risk of either non-Hodgkin lymphoma or esophageal or kidney cancer.

    “Our pooled study of documented TCE-exposed workers provides some evidence for an increased risk of liver cancer, although confounding by other exposures cannot be ruled out. Evaluation of a possible modest risk for kidney cancer and non- Hodgkin lymphoma requires studies with greater statistical power,” the authors write.

    In an accompanying editorial, Mark P. Purdue, Ph.D., of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics at the National Cancer Institute writes that there has been concern with workers exposed to TCE since the early 1970s and that even though it is now classified as a human carcinogen, further research is needed and safer options should be explored. “Where possible, TCE should be substituted by safer alternative chemicals and/or emissions should be reduced. Conversion from conventional vapor degreasers to new low-emission equipment such as enclosed vapor degreasing systems can greatly reduce solvent exposures in the workplace, and aqueous cleaning systems may also be feasible alternatives in certain applications.”

    Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?

    WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
    We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

    www.wholeworldwater.co

    Top of page

     


    Water news directory – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here
    Support Save the Water™ click here.

    Any donation no matter how small assists Save the Water™ in researching and publishing water education articles such as this. Your support is appreciated as STW™ relies on your assistance to continue each day providing you this information. Click here to help support Save the Water™
    Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™
    is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

    Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts

    Vol. V
    642
    May 25 2013

    Water
    Research

    Crisis
    Response

    Humanitarian
    Projects

    Education
    Daily News
    DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS

    Comments Off

    Water contamination news: USA – EPA Adds three sites to the Superfund List – orders continued treatment of contaminated groundwater at former manufacturing facility in Richmond – Va.

    Save the water news education and water research postings

    Save the Water™
    Daily
    News Brief

    Courtesy of
    EPA
    Save the Water™
    Water Education
    Water Research
    Department
    and is shared as
    educational material.
    AQUASQUAD LOGO DILOS PROGRAM A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles. Sponsor a program today DILOS FUNDRAISINGMicroscope images K-4 STEMContaminated drinking WaterPlease make your check payable to Save the Water, Inc. mail to: Singer and Falk Certified Public Accountants 777 Old Country Rd. Plainview, N.Y. 11803

     
     
    Rating for savethewater.org

    Water contamination news: USA

    Water contamination news USA – EPA Adds three sites to the Superfund List – orders continued treatment of contaminated groundwater at former manufacturing Facility in Richmond Va

    EPA Adds the Riverside Industrial Park in Newark, New Jersey to the Superfund List seven acre site along the Passaic River contaminated with PCBs and volatile organic compounds.

    World water day every day Did You Know water fact 3

    Best viewed using Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, and Safari.
    Save the Water™ / Water Research / Water Education / Global Water News ©2013

    Elias Rodriguez, (212) 637-3664, rodriguez.elias@epa.gov

    (New York, N.Y. – May 21, 2013) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has added the Riverside Industrial Park in Newark, New Jersey to the Superfund National Priorities List of the country’s most hazardous waste sites. After a 2009 spill of oily material from the industrial park into the Passaic River, the EPA discovered that chemicals, including benzene, mercury, chromium and arsenic, were improperly stored at the site. The agency took emergency actions to prevent further release of these chemicals into the river. Further investigation showed that soil, ground water and tanks at the Riverside Industrial Park are contaminated with volatile organic compounds and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

    Benzene, mercury, chromium and arsenic are all highly toxic and can cause serious damage to people’s health and the environment. Many volatile organic compounds are known to cause cancer in animals and can cause cancer in people. Polychlorinated biphenyls are chemicals that persist in the environment and can affect the immune, reproductive, nervous and endocrine systems and are potentially cancer-causing.

    EPA proposed the site to the Superfund list in September 2012 and encouraged the public to comment during a 60-day public comment period. After considering public comments and receiving the support of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection for listing the site, the EPA is putting it on the Superfund list.

    “The EPA has kept people out of immediate danger from this contaminated industrial park and can now develop long-term plans to protect the community,” said Judith A. Enck, EPA Regional Administrator. “By adding the site to the Superfund list, the EPA can do the extensive investigation needed to determine the best ways to clean up the contamination and protect public health.”

    Since the early 1900s, the Riverside Industrial Park, at 29 Riverside Avenue in Newark, has been used by many businesses, including a paint manufacturer, a packaging company and a chemical warehouse. The site covers approximately seven acres and contains a variety of industrial buildings, some of which are vacant. In 2009, at the request of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, the EPA responded to an oil spill on the Passaic River that was eventually traced to the Riverside Avenue site. The state and the city of Newark requested the EPA’s help in assessing the contamination at the site and performing emergency actions to identify and stop the source of the spill.

    The EPA plugged discharge pipes from several buildings and two tanks that were identified as the source of the contamination. In its initial assessment of the site, the EPA also found ten abandoned 12,000 to 15,000 gallon underground storage tanks containing hazardous waste, approximately one hundred 3,000 to 10,000 gallon aboveground storage tanks, two tanks containing oily waste, as well as dozens of 55-gallon drums and smaller containers. These containers held a variety of hazardous industrial waste and solvents. Two underground tanks and most of the other containers were removed by the EPA in 2012.

    The EPA periodically proposes sites to the Superfund list and, after responding to public comments, designates them as final Superfund sites. The Superfund final designation makes them eligible for funds to conduct long-term cleanups. The Superfund program operates on the principle that polluters should pay for the cleanups, rather than passing the costs to taxpayers. After sites are placed on the Superfund list of the most contaminated waste sites, the EPA searches for parties responsible for the contamination and holds them accountable for the costs of investigations and cleanups. The search for the parties responsible for the contamination at the Riverside Industrial Park site is ongoing.

    EPA proposes to add Makah Reservation Warmhouse Beach dump to federal Superfund cleanup list.

    Suzanne Skadowski, EPA Public Affairs, 206-553-6689, skadowski.suzanne@epa.gov

    (May 21, 2013 – Seattle) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to add the Warmhouse Beach dump, on the Makah Reservation, in Neah Bay, Washington, to the Superfund National Priorities List. The proposed cleanup listing includes a public comment period from May 23 through July 23, 2013.

    “Adding the Warmhouse Beach dump to EPA’s Superfund cleanup list will help protect the Makah Tribe’s treaty resources and the environment along the Strait of Juan de Fuca,” said Rick Albright, Director of EPA’s Region 10 Office of Environmental Cleanup in Seattle. “The Makah Tribe welcomes EPA’s efforts to assist in the Tribe’s longstanding effort to clean up the Warmhouse Beach dump, our highest environmental priority,” said Timothy J. Greene, Chairman of the Makah Tribal Council. “We look forward to working collaboratively with EPA to finally addressing the serious environmental and health risks that the dump poses to our treaty resources and culturally significant areas.”

    The Warmhouse Beach dump was a 7-acre municipal and hazardous waste dump used in the 1970s-1980s by the Makah Air Force Station and by tribal and non-tribal members until the dump was closed in 2012. Contaminants found at the Warmhouse Beach dump and in nearby creeks include polyaromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs, polybrominated diphenyl ethers or PBDEs, perchlorate, metals, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls or PCBs, and dioxins. Mussels at the beaches also contain elevated concentrations of lead. The Makah Tribe referred the Warmhouse Beach dump to EPA for Superfund cleanup based on concerns about harmful substances leaching from the dump to surface waters and the tribe’s traditionally significant shellfishing beaches.

    Warmhouse Beach is an important natural and cultural resource for the Makah and they have used it as a traditional summer fishing camp and for subsistence harvest of sea urchins, mussels, and steamer clams. Warmhouse Beach is also used for camping, surfing, and other recreational activities. EPA’s Superfund program investigates and cleans up complex and uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites to protect people’s health and the environment, with the ultimate goal of returning them to communities for productive use. Information on the Warmhouse Beach dump: http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/cleanup.nsf/sites/warmhouse

    EPA Adds the Matlack, Inc. Site in Woolwich Township, New Jersey to the Superfund List.

    (New York, N.Y. – May 21, 2013) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has added the Matlack, Inc. site in Woolwich Township, New Jersey to the Superfund National Priorities List of the country’s most hazardous waste sites. The site is a former truck terminal at which operations included truck maintenance and truck, trailer and tanker washing. As a result of past industrial activities, the soil and ground water are contaminated with volatile organic compounds and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Many volatile organic compounds are known to cause cancer in animals and can cause cancer in people. PCBs are chemicals that persist in the environment and can affect the immune, reproductive, nervous and endocrine systems and are potentially cancer-causing. Contamination from this site is impacting the Grand Sprute Run stream and nearby wetlands that have been identified among New Jersey’s most significant natural areas.

    EPA proposed to add the site to the Superfund list in September 2012 and encouraged the public to comment during a 60-day public comment period. After considering public comments and receiving the support of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to list the site, the EPA is putting it on the Superfund list.

    “Placing the Matlack site on the Superfund list is an important step in protecting people’s health and allowing EPA to take action to clean up the site,” said Judith A. Enck, EPA Regional Administrator. “By adding the site to the Superfund list, the EPA can do the extensive investigation needed to determine the best ways to address the contamination and protect public health.”

    Located on Route 322 in Woolwich, New Jersey the site operated as a truck terminal from 1962 to 2001. Previous activities at the 70-acre facility included the cleanup of trucks and tankers used for transporting a variety of materials including flammable and corrosive liquids. The polluted cleaning solution was disposed of in an unlined lagoon behind the terminal building from 1962 until 1976 when Matlack Inc. began transporting the wastewater away from the site for disposal.

    Soil is contaminated with volatile organic compounds and PCBs.

    The lagoon was subsequently filled with a variety of demolition debris and other material. Matlack discontinued the tanker cleaning operations in November 1997, but continued to service and store vehicles at the site until 2001 when it submitted a petition for bankruptcy. Sampling has shown that the soil in several areas of the site is contaminated with volatile organic compounds and PCBs. Sediment and water in Grand Sprute Run stream are contaminated with volatile organic compounds and sampling shows that the ground water beneath the site is contaminated with the industrial cleaning chemical trichloroethylene.

    The EPA periodically proposes sites to the Superfund list and, after responding to public comments, designates them as final Superfund sites. The Superfund final designation makes them eligible for funds to conduct long-term cleanups. The Superfund program operates on the principle that polluters should pay for the cleanups, rather than passing the costs to taxpayers. After sites are placed on the Superfund list of the most contaminated waste sites, the EPA searches for parties responsible for the contamination and holds them accountable for the costs of investigations and cleanups. The search for the parties responsible for the contamination at the Matlack, Inc. site is ongoing. For more information about Superfund, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/region02/superfund.

    EPA orders continued treatment of contaminated groundwater at former manufacturing Facility in Richmond, Va.

    PHILADELPHIA (May 21, 2013) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has reached an administrative settlement with Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. and LSI Corp. regarding a former circuit board manufacturing facility located in Henrico County, at 4500 S. Laburnum Ave., Richmond, Va., requiring the companies to address groundwater contaminated with volatile organic compounds.

    Under an administrative order on consent, LSI Corp. which currently operates and maintains a groundwater treatment system at the facility, is required to continue to do so and implement land and groundwater use restrictions at the facility. Should LSI fail to adequately perform the work under the order, Alcatel-Lucent, the former owner of the facility, has agreed to complete the work.

    Consisting of 120 acres about five miles east of Richmond, Va., the facility manufactured printed circuit boards and during its manufacturing operations, used and stored chlorinated solvents there. In 1986, during the repair of a fire main, the facility discovered releases of chlorinated solvents. The soil surrounding the fire main was excavated, pipes were replaced and a sump in the former solvent recovery area of the plant was repaired. In 1989, the large-scale storage and use of methylene chloride and 1,1,1 trichloroethane was discontinued at the facility when it was discovered that those contaminants were in the shallow groundwater table.

    In 1996 a groundwater remediation system was constructed which LSI will continue to operate and maintain under the oversight of EPA and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ). Given that some residual contamination remains on-site, in order to protect human health and the environment, the EPA order requires a variety of land and groundwater use restrictions on the property situated over the contaminated groundwater plume unless it is demonstrated that such restrictions are not necessary to protect human health or the environment. The restrictions include: a prohibition on building any new structure, no residential use, no earth moving activities including soil excavation and drilling, and no new wells.

    Top of page

    Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?

    WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
    We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

    www.wholeworldwater.co

    Top of page

     


    Water news directory – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here
    Support Save the Water™ click here.

    Any donation no matter how small assists Save the Water™ in researching and publishing water education articles such as this. Your support is appreciated as STW™ relies on your assistance to continue each day providing you this information. Click here to help support Save the Water™

    Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™
    is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

    Save the water Education Dept  DILOS K-4 Save the Water - World Water Day Is Every Day Water Facts

    Vol. V
    638
    May 21 2013

    Water
    Research

    Crisis
    Response

    Humanitarian
    Projects

    Education
    Daily News
    DILOS Program DILOS PROGRAM a day in the life of a scientist water education A day in the life of a scientist DILOS program: youth education principles.Sponsor a program today. Save the water before its too lateMicrosope Videos STEM WATER INFOGRAPHICS

    Leave a comment

    Water contamination – what is fracking – Fracking defined – special education edition – with 15 fracking infographics.

    Water contamination – special education edition: Fracking

    Fracking defined

    To view hydraulic fracturing infograghics click on toggles.

    Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

    Hydraulic fracturing is the propagation of fractures in a rock layer by a pressurized fluid. Some hydraulic fractures form naturally certain veins or dikes are examples—and can create conduits along which gas and petroleum from source rocks may migrate to reservoir rocks. Induced hydraulic fracturing or hydrofracturing, commonly known as fracing, fraccing, or fracking, is a technique used to release petroleum, natural gas (including shale gas, tight gas, and coal seam gas), or other substances for extraction. This type of fracturing creates fractures from a wellbore drilled into reservoir rock formations.

    The first use of hydraulic fracturing was in 1947. However, it was only in 1998 that modern fracturing technology, referred to as horizontal slickwater fracturing, made possible the economical extraction of shale gas; this new technology was first used in the Barnett Shale in Texas. The energy from the injection of a highly pressurized hydraulic fracturing fluid creates new channels in the rock, which can increase the extraction rates and ultimate recovery of hydrocarbons.

    Proponents of hydraulic fracturing point to the economic benefits from vast amounts of formerly inaccessible hydrocarbons the process can extract. Opponents point to potential environmental impacts, including contamination of ground water, risks to air quality, the migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals to the surface, surface contamination from spills and flowback and the health effects of these. For these reasons hydraulic fracturing has come under scrutiny internationally, with some countries suspending or banning it.

    History

    Fracturing as a method to stimulate shallow, hard rock oil wells dates back to the 1860s. It was applied by oil producers in the US states of Pennsylvania, New York, Kentucky, and West Virginia by using liquid and later also solidified nitroglycerin. Later, the same method was applied to water and gas wells. The idea to use acid as a nonexplosive fluid for well stimulation was introduced in the 1930s. Due to acid etching, fractures would not close completely and therefore productivity was enhanced. The same phenomenon was discovered with water injection and squeeze cementing operations.

    The relationship between well performance and treatment pressures was studied by Floyd Farris of Stanolind Oil and Gas Corporation. This study became a basis of the first hydraulic fracturing experiment, which was conducted in 1947 at the Hugoton gas field in Grant County of southwestern Kansas by Stanolind. For the well treatment 1,000 US gallons (3,800 l; 830 imp gal) of gelled gasoline and sand from the Arkansas River was injected into the gas-producing limestone formation at 2,400 feet (730 m).

    The experiment was not very successful as deliverability of the well did not change appreciably. The process was further described by J.B. Clark of Stanolind in his paper published in 1948. A patent on this process was issued in 1949 and an exclusive license was granted to the Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Company. On March 17, 1949, Halliburton performed the first two commercial hydraulic fracturing treatments in Stephens County, Oklahoma, and Archer County, Texas.[15] Since then, hydraulic fracturing has been used to stimulate approximately a million oil and gas wells.

    In the Soviet Union, the first hydraulic proppant fracturing was carried out in 1952. In Western Europe in 1977–1985, hydraulic fracturing was conducted at Rotliegend and Carboniferous gas-bearing sandstones in Germany, Netherlands onshore and offshore gas fields, and the United Kingdoms sector of the North Sea. Other countries in Europe and Northern Africa included Norway, the Soviet Union, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Austria, France, Italy, Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey, Tunisia, and Algeria.

    Due to shale’s high porosity and low permeability, technology research, development and demonstration were necessary before hydraulic fracturing could be commercially applied to shale gas deposits. In the 1970s the United States government initiated the Eastern Gas Shales Project, a set of dozens of public-private hydraulic fracturing pilot demonstration projects. During the same period, the Gas Research Institute, a gas industry research consortium, received approval for research and funding from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

    In 1977, the Department of Energy pioneered massive hydraulic fracturing in tight sandstone formations. In 1997, based on earlier techniques used by Union Pacific Resources, now part of Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, Mitchell Energy, now part of Devon Energy, developed the hydraulic fracturing technique known as “slickwater fracturing” which involves adding chemicals to water to increase the fluid flow, that made the shale gas extraction economical.

    Method A hydraulic fracture is formed by pumping the fracturing fluid into the wellbore at a rate sufficient to increase pressure downhole to exceed that of the fracture gradient (pressure gradient) of the rock. The fracture gradient is defined as the pressure increase per unit of the depth due to its density and it is usually measured in pounds per square inch per foot or bars per meter. The rock cracks and the fracture fluid continues further into the rock, extending the crack still further, and so on.

    Operators typically try to maintain “fracture width”, or slow its decline, following treatment by introducing into the injected fluid a proppant – a material such as grains of sand, ceramic, or other particulates, that prevent the fractures from closing when the injection is stopped and the pressure of the fluid is reduced. Consideration of proppant strengths and prevention of proppant failure becomes more important at greater depths where pressure and stresses on fractures are higher. The propped fracture is permeable enough to allow the flow of formation fluids to the well. Formation fluids include gas, oil, salt water, fresh water and fluids introduced to the formation during completion of the well during fracturing.

    During the process fracturing fluid leakoff, loss of fracturing fluid from the fracture channel into the surrounding permeable rock occurs. If not controlled properly, it can exceed 70% of the injected volume. This may result in formation matrix damage, adverse formation fluid interactions, or altered fracture geometry and thereby decreased production efficiency.

    The location of one or more fractures along the length of the borehole is strictly controlled by various methods that create or seal off holes in the side of the wellbore. Typically, hydraulic fracturing is performed in cased wellbores and the zones to be fractured are accessed by perforating the casing at those locations.

    Hydraulic-fracturing equipment used in oil and natural gas fields usually consists of a slurry blender, one or more high-pressure, high-volume fracturing pumps (typically powerful triplex or quintuplex pumps) and a monitoring unit. Associated equipment includes fracturing tanks, one or more units for storage and handling of proppant, high-pressure treating iron, a chemical additive unit (used to accurately monitor chemical addition), low-pressure flexible hoses, and many gauges and meters for flow rate, fluid density, and treating pressure. Fracturing equipment operates over a range of pressures and injection rates, and can reach up to 100 megapascals (15,000 psi) and 265 litres per second (9.4 cu ft/s) (100 barrels per minute).

    Fracturing fluids.

    Proppants and fracking fluids and List of additives for hydraulic fracturing

    High-pressure fracture fluid is injected into the wellbore, with the pressure above the fracture gradient of the rock. The two main purposes of fracturing fluid is to extend fractures and to carry proppant into the formation, the purpose of which is to stay there without damaging the formation or production of the well. Two methods of transporting the proppant in the fluid are used – high-rate and high-viscosity. High-viscosity fracturing tends to cause large dominant fractures, while high-rate (slickwater) fracturing causes small spread-out micro-fractures.

    This fracture fluid contains water-soluble gelling agents (such as guar gum) which increase viscosity and efficiently deliver the proppant into the formation.

    The fluid injected into the rock is typically a slurry of water, proppants, and chemical  additives. Additionally, gels, foams, and compressed gases, including nitrogen, carbon dioxide and air can be injected. Typically, of the fracturing fluid 90% is water and 9.5% is sand with the chemical additives accounting to about 0.5%.

    A proppant is a material that will keep an induced hydraulic fracture open, during or following a fracturing treatment, and can be gel, foam, or slickwater-based. Fluids make tradeoffs in such material properties as viscosity, where more viscous fluids can carry more concentrated proppant; the energy or pressure demands to maintain a certain flux pump rate (flow velocity) that will conduct the proppant appropriately; pH, various rheological factors, among others. Types of proppant include silica sand, resin-coated sand, and man-made ceramics.

    These vary depending on the type of permeability or grain strength needed. The most commonly used proppant is silica sand, though proppants of uniform size and shape, such as a ceramic proppant, is believed to be more effective. Due to a higher porosity within the fracture, a greater amount of oil and natural gas is liberated.

    The fracturing fluid varies in composition depending on the type of fracturing used, the conditions of the specific well being fractured, and the water characteristics. A typical fracture treatment uses between 3 and 12 additive chemicals. Although there may be unconventional fracturing fluids, the typical used chemical additives are:

    •Acids—hydrochloric acid (usually 28%-5%), or acetic acid is used in the pre-fracturing stage for cleaning the perforations and initiating fissure in the near-wellbore rock.

    •Sodium chloride (salt)—delays breakdown of the gel polymer chains.

    •Polyacrylamide and other friction reducers—minimizes the friction between fluid and pipe, thus allowing the pumps to pump at a higher rate without having greater pressure on the surface. Polyacrylamide are good suspension agents ensuring the proppant does not fall out.

    • Ethylene glycol—prevents formation of scale deposits in the pipe.

    •Borate salts—used for maintaining fluid viscosity during the temperature increase.

    •Sodium and potassium carbonates—used for maintaining effectiveness of crosslinkers.

    •Glutaraldehyde—used as disinfectant of the water (bacteria elimination).

    •Guar gum and other water-soluble gelling agents—increases viscosity of the fracturing fluid to deliver more efficiently the proppant into the formation.

    •Citric acid—used for corrosion prevention.

    •Isopropanol—increases the viscosity of the fracture fluid.

    The most common chemical used for hydraulic fracturing in the United States in 2005–2009 was methanol, while some other most widely used chemicals were isopropyl alcohol, 2-butoxyethanol, and ethylene glycol.

    Typical fluid types.

    • Conventional linear gels. These gels are cellulose derivatives (carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, carboxymethyl hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, methyl hydroxyl ethyl cellulose), guar or its derivatives (hydroxypropyl guar, carboxymethyl hydroxypropyl guar) based, with other chemicals providing the necessary chemistry for the desired results.

    •Borate-crosslinked fluids. These are guar-based fluids cross-linked with boron ions (from aqueous borax/boric acid solution). These gels have higher viscosity at pH 9 onwards and are used to carry proppants. After the fracturing job the pH is reduced to 3–4 so that the cross-links are broken and the gel is less viscous and can be pumped out.

    •Organometallic-crosslinked fluids zirconium, chromium, antimony, titanium salts are known to crosslink the guar based gels. The crosslinking mechanism is not reversible. So once the proppant is pumped down along with the cross-linked gel, the fracturing part is done. The gels are broken down with appropriate breakers.

    •Aluminium phosphate-ester oil gels. Aluminium phosphate and ester oils are slurried to form cross-linked gel. These are one of the first known gelling systems.

    For slickwater it is common to include sweeps or a reduction in the proppant concentration temporarily to ensure the well is not overwhelmed with proppant causing a screen-off. As the fracturing process proceeds, viscosity reducing agents such as oxidizers and enzyme breakers are sometimes then added to the fracturing fluid to deactivate the gelling agents and encourage flowback. The oxidizer reacts with the gel to break it down, reducing the fluid’s viscosity and ensuring that no proppant is pulled from the formation.

    An enzyme acts as a catalyst for the breaking down of the gel. Sometimes pH modifiers are used to break down the crosslink at the end of a hydraulic fracturing job, since many require a pH buffer system to stay viscous.  At the end of the job the well is commonly flushed with water (sometimes blended with a friction reducing chemical) under pressure.

    Injected fluid is to some degree recovered and is managed by several methods, such as underground injection control, treatment and discharge, recycling, or temporary storage in pits or containers while new technology is being continually being developed and improved to better handle waste water and improve re-usability.

    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
    Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

    The Dead Pelican

    Click Here For Lake Peigneur Part One: Video – Lake Peigneur could be worse than Assumption sinkhole
    Click Here For Lake Peigneur Part Two: Largest man-made vortex – Lake Peigneur update – special report.
    Click Here For Grand Bayou sinkhole begins Part One: Bayou Corne – Grand Bayou sinkhole begins – can it end?
    Click Here For Grand Bayou sinkhole begins Part Two: 06/28/13–05/16/13–facts about Grand Bayou sink hole. 

    Richard Branson – Water crisis – How do we save the water?

    WHOLE WORLD Water seeks to prove that economic, social, and environmental progress are not mutually exclusive. Developed to end the global water and sanitation crisis, WHOLE WORLD Water works to engage the hospitality and tourism industry to filter, bottle, and sell its own water, and contribute 10% of the proceeds to the WHOLE WORLD Water Fund. 100% of the proceeds will go directly to clean and safe water initiatives worldwide.
    We believe that everyone should have access to clean and safe water. Visit Sir Richard Branson

    www.wholeworldwater.co

    Top of page

    DILOS DILOS PROGRAM DILOS


    Water news archives – 750 articles-March 2012~May 2013: updated daily – click here   Support Save the Water™ click here.

    Supporting the water research and education programs of Save the Water™ is vital to our future generation’s health, your funding is needed today.

    Comments Off
    Do you need quick support ?

    Welcome

    * required
    Send Message